Finding on title cannot be recorded in a suit for injunction unless there are necessary pleadings and appropriate issue regarding title.

1. This Second Appeal is filed challenging the decree and judgment, dated 20.11.2004 in A.S.No.10 of 2002 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Hindupur reversing in appeal the decree and judgment dated 27.02.2002 in O.S.No.241 of 1992 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Hindupur. For the sake of convenience the parties will be hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed in the trial Court.

2. The case of the plaintiff is that late Chinna Gowramma, wife of Venkata Reddy, during her lifetime, has been in possession and enjoyment of the land admeasuring Ac.6.29 Pyki in survey No.346/1; Ac.3.43 Pyki in survey No.327/2; Acs.4.50 Pyki and 1.25 in survey No.343/1 and Ac.0.29 Pyki in survey No.384/7 situated in Kallurupalem village of Hindupur Mandal in Anantapur District (hereafter, suit schedule property). Gowramma by registered Will dated 13.02.1985 bequeathed the suit schedule property in favour of the plaintiff. Gowramma died on 18.12.1991; thereafter, the plaintiff has been in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property as absolute owner. The defendant, without any right whatsoever, is trying to interfere with the suit schedule property. Having no other alternative, the plaintiff filed the suit for perpetual injunction.

3. The defendant filed written statement inter alia contending that Gowramma has no right whatsoever to execute the Will dated 13.2.1985 in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant and mother of the plaintiff by name Narayanamma are sisters; both of them are daughters of Gowramma and Venkata Reddy. The suit schedule property belongs to Venkata Reddy, who died 20 or 25 years prior to filing of the suit. After the death of Venkata Reddy, his wife Gowramma, the defendant and Narayanamma succeeded the suit schedule property. At the time of marriage of Narayanamma with Adinarayanappa, at the advice of village elders, Gowramma executed two gift deeds on 13.03.1975; one in favour of the defendant and the other in favour of Narayanamma.

4. The defendant and Narayanamma have accepted and acted upon the gift deeds. At the instance of Narayanamma and her husband, Gowramma filed O.S.No.10 of 1991 against the defendant and the same was dismissed for default. Gowramma executed nominal sale deeds in favour of K.N.Sivasankar Reddy, K.N.Narasimha Reddy and R.Thimma Reddy on 20.11.1991, 4.11.1991 and 04.11.1991 respectively. The defendant filed O.S.No.123 of 1992 on the file the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Hindupur seeking declaration of title and permanent injunction and the said suit was decreed. The defendant is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property. The suit as framed is not maintainable for non-jointer of proper and necessary parties. Hence, the suit may be dismissed.

5. Basing on the rival contentions, the trial Court framed the following issues:

1) Whether Chinna Gowramma executed registered gift deed on 13.03.1975 in respect of the suit schedule land?

2) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for permanent injunction on the suit land?

3) To what relief?

6. In the trial Court, on behalf of the plaintiff, PWs.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.3 were marked. On behalf of the defendant, DW.1 was examined and Exs.B.1 to B.8 were got marked.

7. After analysing the oral, documentary evidence and other material available on record, the trial Court arrived at a conclusion that the plaintiff is entitled for perpetual injunction and accordingly decreed the suit. Aggrieved by the decree and judgment of the trial Court, the defendant preferred A.S.No.10 of 2002 on the file of Senior Civil Judge Court, Hindupur and the same was allowed. Feeling aggrieved, the unsuccessful plaintiff preferred the present second appeal.

8. The substantial questions of law raised in this second appeal is as follows:

“Whether the evidence on record in respect of the proof of Exs.A.1 to A.3, particularly Ex.A.1 is in conformity with the provisions of Section 58 of the Indian Evidence Act and Section 63 of the Indian Su