The Appeal against the decree and judgment dated 20.04.1993, whereunder and unsuccessful plaintiff in O.S. No.7 of 1985 on the file of Subordinate Judge (Senior Civil Judge), Machilipatnam, preferred this whereby the Suit filed for declaration of title and for specific performance of agreement to transfer dated 05.01.1963 in his favour executed by the first defendant was dismissed.

2. The appellant herein was the plaintiff and the respondents herein were the defendants before the trial Court in O.S. No.7 of 1985. During the pendency of this Appeal, first respondent herein died and her legal representatives i.e., respondents 3 to 8 herein were brought on record as per the order in A.S.M.P. No.47811 of 2004, dated 10.09.2004; second respondent herein also died and his legal representatives i.e., respondents 9 to 16 were brought on record as per the order in A.S.M.P. No.545 of 2007, dated 29.03.2007.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter will be referred to as plaintiff and defendants.

4. Plaintiff filed the Suit in O.S. No.7 of 1985 before Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam, seeking the relief of declaration of title and specific performance of agreement to transfer dated 05.01.1963 and for future profits alleging that the plaintiff and defendants are the nearest relatives and the plaintiff started Chit Fund business in the year 1962, Second defendant herein was a partner in the said Chit Fund business. In the said Chit Fund business, the plaintiff sustained huge loss; whereupon the plaintiff was threatened by his creditors to send him to prison foisting false cases and filed Insolvency Petition to adjudge the plaintiff as insolvent. Thereby, the plaintiff was landed in troubles when his enemies came to know about purchase of schedule property by the plaintiff. The plaintiff purchased schedule property in an extent of Ac.2.41 cents of land in R.S. No.625/1 at Kaikaluru from one Panja Suramma which is more fully described in the schedule annexed to the plaint for consideration of Rs.4,000/- under an agreement of sale in the year 1963 but, the plaintiff however to avoid litigation and save the schedule land from his enemies, obtained sale deed in the name of first defendant as benami transaction to the knowledge of second defendant, who is a partner in his Chit Fund business. Thus, the schedule property was purchased by the plaintiff in the name of first defendant as a benamidar but the property is being managed by the second defendant leasing out the same to one Pantu Lakshmanna, collecting amount and paying the same to plaintiff. Thus, the defendants are trustees of the plaintiff managing the schedule property.

5. The first defendant on 05.01.1963 executed an agreement in favour of plaintiff to execute the transfer deed in favour of the plaintiff after litigation came to an end. Thus, the plaintiff became the purchaser of the schedule property under contract of transfer from the first defendant. Though the property was purchased in the name of first defendant, the plaintiff alone is in constructive possession and enjoyment of the property.

6. Criminal cases filed against the plaintiff were ended and insolvency proceedings were also annulled in the year 1971 itself by an order of Senior Civil Judge, Gudivada, the plaint schedule property was got vested in the Official Receiver, so a claim petition was got filed by the first defendant and the claim was got allowed by the plaintiff. All these proceedings pending against the plaintiff were closed. Then, the plaintiff requested the first defendant to transfer the plaint schedule property in his favour but the first defendant postponed the same by giving evasive replies; thereupon the plaintiff got issued a legal notice dated 02.06.1984 demanding the first defendant to execute a sale deed and render account of income derived from his property, but no reply was issued by the first defendant. The second defendant issued a reply with false allegations and he is not