IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.
Shaik Nagoor Bibi - Appellants
Vs.
Shaik Pakeer Saheb - Respondent
Appeal Suit No. 56 of 1995
Decided On: 04.04.2014
Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 52 – Specific Relief Act – Section 34 – Suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession – Appeal against impugned decree and judgment wherein the Suit filed for declaration of title to plaint A schedule property, for recovery of possession and for a consequential direction to the defendants 6 to 10 to deposit Rs. 1,800/- into Court, being the rents collected for 10 months, was dismissed – Plaintiff filed Suit seeking the reliefs mentioned hereinabove at alleging that she is a resident of village and gave birth to a son due to her illicit intimacy with one Subsequent to death of she developed illicit intimacy with one Satyam, through whom she gave birth to three daughters – About 7 or 8 years prior to filing of the Suit, some disputes arose between plaintiff and Satyam due to they got separated and discontinued their relationship one resident of who came down and started a sundry business in a wooden bunk, in front of daughters house of the plaintiff developed illicit intimacy with the plaintiff and continued their relationship for a period of 2 years. Subsequently made the plaintiff to convert into Islam and married her as per the Islamic caste custom, 4 years prior to filing of the Suit, performing the presence of mosque elders. Since then, the plaintiff and lived as wife and husband – Held, Consideration of the entire material available on record, the trial Court, on appreciation of both fact and law, declined to grant the reliefs and even on reappraisal of entire evidence, both oral and documentary, I find no iota of truth in the allegations made in the plaint regarding marital relationship between the plaintiff and and it appears that the plaintiff is a woman of loose character or easy virtue, living with the man of her liking by developing illicit contact and trying to gain profit out of such illicit contact. In such a case, this Court cannot exercise its discretion under Section 34 of Specific Relief Act, to grant the relief of declaration in of plaintiff. If the trial Court did not exercise its discretion properly, then this Court being the 1st appellate Court can interfere with the finding, but when it properly exercised its discretion, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the finding of the trial Court denying the declaratory relief – Appeal shall stand dismissed
M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.
1. The unsuccessful plaintiff in Original Suit No. 57 of 1981, on the file of Subordinate Judge (Now Senior Civil Judge), Kovvur, West Godavari District, preferred this Appeal against the impugned decree and judgment dated 25.06.1986, wherein the Suit filed for declaration of title to plaint 'A' schedule property, for recovery of possession and for a consequential direction to the defendants 6 to 10 to deposit Rs. 1,800/- into Court, being the rents collected for 10 months, was dismissed.
2. The appellant herein was the plaintiff and the respondents 1 and 5 herein were the defendants 1 to 5, respondents 6 and 7 herein were defendants 7 and 8, 8th respondent herein was the 10th defendant before the trial Court, in Original Suit No. 57 of 1981. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter will be referred as arrayed before the trial Court.
3. During the pendency of Appeal, 5th respondent herein died and as his legal heirs were not brought on record, the Appeal stood abated against him, as per the orders of this Court on 30.03.2001. The Appeal stands dismissed for default, against respondents 6 and 7 herein, vide Court Order dated 17.12.2003.
4. The plaintiff filed the Suit seeking the reliefs mentioned hereinabove at 1st para, alleging that she is a resident of Islampet in Kovvur village and gave birth to a son due to her illicit intimacy with one Venkataraju. Subsequent to the death of Venkataraju, she developed illicit intimacy with one Srirangam Satyam, through whom she gave birth to three daughters. About 7 or 8 years prior to filing of the Suit, some disputes arose between the plaintiff and Srirangam Satyam, due to which, they got separated and discontinued their relationship. Thereafter, one Shaik Meerasaheb, resident of Hukumpet, who came down to Kovvur and started a sundry business in a wooden bunk, in front of the daughter's house of the plaintiff, developed illicit intimacy with the plaintiff and continued their relationship for a period of 2 years. Subsequently, Meerasaheb made the plaintiff to convert into Islam and married her as per the Islamic caste custom, 4 years prior to filing of the Suit, performing nikha in the presence of mosque elders. Since then, the plaintiff and Meerasaheb lived as wife and husband.
5. Believing the words of Meerasaheb, plaintiff handed over an amount of Rs. 30,000/- and 18 sovereigns of gold, so as to enable him to start large scale business and purchase site to construct house in the 13th ward. Thus, the plaintiff parted with huge amount and gold, with which, Meerasaheb purchased site under an agreement of sale dated 14.04.1974 from Sri Kantamani Ramachandra Rao, S/o. Prakasam, for Rs. 1,740/-. However, regular sale deed was not executed as the vendor failed to obtain Urban Land Ceiling (ULC) clearance, as a result of which, registered sale deed could not be obtained by Meerasaheb, but constructed a 4 portioned Mangalore tiled house in 13th Ward, on Plot No. 15, comprising of 340 Sq. yards, out of 684 Sq. yards, in T.P. No. 80/50 of Kovvur municipal limits and later, when the plaintiff demanded Meerasaheb to return her gold ornaments and cash, he did not heed to the request of the plaintiff.
6. Later, there were differences between the plaintiff and Meerasaheb, her alleged husband, on account of his 1st wife's interference; thereupon, the plaintiff returned to her daughter's house in Islampet. Later, 1st wife of Meerasaheb died; since then the plaintiff and Meerasaheb lived in the house of her daughter, while acting as loyal towards her. During their stay at the daughter's residence of the plaintiff, she raised a dispute before village elders, in whose presence, Meerasaheb admitted about taking an amount of Rs. 30,000/- and 18 sovereigns of gold, pledged with the marvadi, for raising money to clear his debts, from the plaintiff. Since then, their relationship was not cordial, Meerasaheb expressed his intention to execute promissory notes for the a
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.