JUDGMENT :

G.M. MOHIUDDIN, J.

Heard Sri N.Pavan Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri G.Mohan Sai Babu, learned counsel representing Sri R.Chandrasekhar, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the record.

2. This appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’), assails the Judgment and Decree dated 25.07.2019 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, in O.S.No.136 of 2015. By the said judgment and decree, the trial Court decreed the suit declaring the respondent/plaintiff as the absolute owner of the suit schedule property viz., agricultural land admeasuring Ac.4-00 Gts., in Sy.No.78/A situated at Jubilee Nagar Village, Karimnagar Mandal and District. The trial Court further declared the revenue entries standing in the name of the defendant/appellant in respect of the said property as illegal and directed the defendant/appellant to deliver vacant possession thereof to the respondent/plaintiff within a period of two months from the date of the decree.

3. The appellant, Sri Lingampally Madan Mohan Reddy, died during the pendency of the present appeal. Consequently, his legal representatives were brought on record vide order dated 12.09.2025 passed by this Court in I.A.No.2 of 2023 and thereafter, prosecuted the present appeal.

4. The appellant No.1 herein is the defendant and the respondent herein is the plaintiff before the trial Court.

5. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they were arrayed before the trial Court.

Factual Background

6. The dispute between the parties arises out of an Agreement of Sale dated 16.07.1997 (Ex.B-40). Under the said agreement, the plaintiff agreed to sell agricultural land admeasuring Ac.4-00 Gts. out of the total extent of Ac.9-30 Gts. in Sy.No.78/A situated at Jubilee Nagar Village, Karimnagar Mandal and District to the defendant for a total sale consideration of Rs.3,75,000/-. On the date of the agreement, the defendant paid an advance amount of Rs.1,00,000/-, and the remaining balance sale consideration of Rs.2,75,000/- was agreed to be paid on or before the last week of September, 1997 or the first week of October, 1997.

7. It was the case of the plaintiff that the defendant failed to pay the entire balance sale consideration within the agreed time. According to the plaintiff, the defendant made only part-payments amounting to Rs.1,70,000/- and thereafter, failed to pay the remaining amount. It was further stated that due to such default, the plaintiff and his father, who was a confirming party to the agreement, cancelled the Agreement of Sale and called upon the defendant to take back the amount already paid by him. As the defendant failed to do so and continued to claim rights over the suit schedule property, the plaintiff filed O.S.No.136 of 2015 seeking declaration of title and recovery of possession of the suit schedule property.

8. On the other hand, the defendant contended that he had paid not only the entire sale consideration of Rs.3,75,000/- but a total amount of Rs.4,00,000/- in eight installments through cash and cheques. It was the further case of the defendant that after payment of the last instalment on 16.02.1999, the plaintiff delivered possession of the suit schedule property to him. The defendant further contended that he had been in continuous, open and uninterrupted possession of the suit schedule property ever since, established a Dambar (Hot Mix) Plant and constructed residential structures therein. The defendant also claimed that the transaction was regularized under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short ‘ROR Act’) and that Pattadar Pass Books, Title Deed Books, and 13-B and 13-C Certificates were issued in his favour by the revenue authorities. The defendant also pleaded adverse possession contending that he had been in continuous and uninterrupted possession of the suit schedule property for more than twelve