Krishnaswami Nayudu, J.-

The defendant is the appellant and the appeal is against the decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Bapatla in O.S. No. 30 of 1947, the decree being for damages for breach of covenant of title and quiet possession. Two acres eighty-four cents of dry lands originally belonged to one Jalam-botlu, who leased it to the plaintiff’s father for a period of 25 years under Exhibit A-1, dated 4th October, 1921, on an annual rental of Rs. 76, subject to a payment of quit rent out of the maktha amounting to Rs. 2-5-6. The property owned by Jalambotlu was of the extent of 3 acres and odd. After the death of Jalambotlu his widow Sitaramamma, who acquired absolute rights to the property under a will left by her husband, conveyed 2 acres and 84 cents out of the 3 acres and odd owned by Jalambotlu to the defendant under a sale deed Exhibit B-2, dated 24th June 1932 for a consideration of Rs. 1,250. The property was already subject to an attachment before the judgment in O.S. No. 170 of 1932, a suit instituted by one Subbamma against Sitaramamma, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 500. Subsequently a decree was also passed in the suit. On 15th September, 1933, the defendant conveyed 2 acres and 84 cents of lands to the plaintiff under the original of Exhibit B-3 for Rs. 1,200. Out of the consideration, a sum of Rs. 500 was received by the defendant for the purpose of discharging the decree debt in O.S. No. 170 of 1932 in which there was already an attachment pending against the property. But after the sale deed, obviously, the defendant having received the amount of Rs. 500 did not pay and satisfy the decree in O.S. No. 170 of 1932 and further proceedings in execution of the decree appears to have been taken and 2 acres and 84 cents of lands were sold on 9th November, 1936 and symbolical possession was taken in favour of the auction-purchaser. The defendant instead of paying and settling the decree in O.S. No. 170 of 1932 appears to have launched himself in litigation by filing a claim petition and after dismissal of the claim petition by instituting a claim suit O.S. No. 508 of 1933 in the District Munsif’s Court, Ongole, which was dismissed on the 28th November, 1935. He filed an appeal against that decision A.S. No. 4 of 1936, which likewise was dismissed on the 16th August, 1937. Not content with this, he appears to have filed S.A. No. 142 of 1938 in this Court, which received a similar fate of dismissal on the 11th February, 1941. It may be mentioned that in not one of these proceedings started by the defendant the plaintiff was a party.

The auction-purchser by the strength of his purchase of the property in court auction instituted O.S. No. 112 of 1943 in the District Munsif’s Court, Ongole against the plaintiff for recovery of the makthas or the lease amount due up to 1913, i.e., a total sum of Rs. 612-12-0. The plaintiff resisted the suit on the strength of his title and possession by the purchase under the original of Exhibit B-3, but the suit was decreed in favour of the auction-purchaser on the 30th September, 1943. The plaintiff appealed in A.S. No. 31 of 1944 on the file of the Subordinate Judge’s court of Bapatla and the appeal was dismissed on 16th January, 1945. The period of 25 years’ lease also expired on 4th October, 1946 and the auction-purchaser took actual possession on 22nd March, 1947. The present suit for breach of covenant of title and quiet possession was instituted on nth April, 1947. The plaintiff claimed a sum of Rs. 9,500 as damages for the breach. The suit was resisted by the defendant in his written statement. He denied that there was any covenant of title and on the other hand pleaded that there was an agreement not to claim compensation or damages in regards to warranties of title, possession and enjoyment except in regard to any alienations made by himself of the suit property and also raised a plea of limitation besides questioning the quantum of damages claimed by the plaintiff. The low

Click Here to Read the rest of this document