APHC010186292025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3397]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO SECOND APPEAL NO: 343/2025 Between:

Raja Venkatachalam and Others ...APPELLANT(S)

AND Kandula Usha and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Appellant(S):

1. GRANDHI PRIYANKA Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. P S P SURESH KUMAR The Court made the following:

Reserved on 18.02.2026 Pronounced on 09.03.22002266: APHC:8950 Uploaded on 09.03.2026 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO SECOND APPEAL No.343 of 2025

JUDGMENT:

This second appeal is filed aggrieved against the Judgment and decree dated 03.01.2025, in A.S.No.27 of 2023, on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Nellore, confirming the Judgment and decree dated 06.02.2023, in O.S.No.09 of 2019, on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nellore.

2. The appellants herein are the defendants and the respondent No.1 herein is the plaintiff in O.S.No.09 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nellore.

3. The plaintiff initiated action in O.S.No.09 of 2019 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nellore, with a prayer for declaration of her title over the plaint schedule property for delivery of possession and also for declaration that the documents executed by the defendant Nos.1 to 4 as null and void and sought for mandatory injunction for removal of the constructions raised by the defendants in the suit schedule property and also for permanent injunction restraining the defendant Nos.1 and 2 and their men from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the plaint schedule property after handing over vacant possession to the plaintiff.

4. The learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nellore, decreed the suit with costs. Felt aggrieved of the same, the unsuccessful defendants in the above said suit filed the aforesaid appeal before the first appellate Court. The learned III Additional District Judge, Nellore, dismissed the first appeal by confirming the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. Aggrieved thereby, the unsuccessful defendants/appellants approached this Court by way of second appeal.

5. For the sake of convenience, both parties in the second appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in the original suit.

6. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, as set out in the plaint averments in O.S.No.09 of 2019, is as follows:

The plaintiff is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule property and she purchased the same from the legal heirs of Epuru Sulochanamma for a valuable sale consideration of Rs.1,80,000/- on 11.01.1996, under a registered sale deed and since then she has been in possession and enjoyment of the same. The plaintiff pleaded that originally the plaint schedule property along with other properties No.1941 and other adjacent survey numbers belonged to one Thikkavarapu family members and the father of the defendant No.3 by name Thikkavarapu Pattabhirami Reddy. The plaintiff further pleaded Thikkavarapu Rami Reddy and his two sons Thikkavarapu Pattabhirami Reddy and Siva Kumar Reddy partitioned their ancestral properties under a partition deed dated 20.08.1944, and the plaint schedule property and other several properties devolved on the father of the defendant No.3 by name T.Pattabhirami Reddy. The plaintiff further pleaded that, thereafter the father of the defendant No.3 laid plots in different survey numbers including S.No.1941 and obtained approved lay out from the Panchayat Nellore Bit I Village. The father of the defendant No.3 gifted some properties in favour of his wife, Smt. Snehalatha Reddy on 11.12.1974, and registered the same. Thereafter, the said Snehalatha Reddy died intestate on 20.01.1977, and the plaint schedule property along with other several properties under the gift deed reverted to her husband and children. The plaintiff further plea