IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA Between:

Vishwambara Educational Society, reptd by its Secretary-Chandupatla Devender Reddy and another.

… Appellants And Donti Indrasena Reddy @ Indra Reddy, S/o Venkat Reddy … Respondent JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON 19.06.2025 HON’BLE JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers : No may be allowed to see the Judgment?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reporters/Journals? : Yes

3. Whether her Lordship wishes to see the fair copy of the Judgment? : Yes _______________________________________ JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY HON'BLE JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY % 19.06.2025 Between:

# Vishwambara Educational Society, reptd by its Secretary-Chandupatla Devender Reddy and another.

..... Appellants And:

$ Donti Indrasena Reddy @ Indra Reddy, S/o Venkat Reddy ....Respondent < Gist:

> Head Note:

! Counsel for the appellants: Sri H.Venugopal, learned senior counsel For Sri Nalla Mukund Reddy ^ Counsel for Respondent: Sri J.Prabhakar, Learned senior counsel for Sri A.Prabhakar Rao ? Cases Referred:

1. 2011(9) SCC 126 2. 2020(7) SCC 366

3. 2020 (13) SCC 143 4. 2022(15) SCC 260

5. 2025 SCC Online SC 121 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY SECOND APPEAL No.483 of 2023

JUDGMENT:

This Appeal is filed aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 08.09.2023, passed by the I Additional District Judge, at Warangal, in A.S.No.10 of 2023, whereby and whereunder the order, dated 23.01.2023, passed by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Warangal, in I.A.No.499 of 2022 in O.S.No.284 of 2012 was set aside.

2. The appellants herein are the defendants and respondent herein is the plaintiff in the suit, before the trial Court. For convenience, hereinafter, the parties are referred to as they are arrayed in the suit.

3. The brief facts of the case are that plaintiff filed suit in O.S.No.284 of 2012 against the defendants, seeking cancellation of the registered sale deed bearing document No.234/2001, dated 14.05.2001 and also for perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. In the plaint, it is averred that plaintiff is the owner of land in Sy.No.521/B, to an extent of Acs.2.24 gts, situated at Bollikunta Village, Warangal District (hereinafter referred to as ‘suit schedule land’); that defendant No.1-Educational Society is running college which is situated towards eastern side of the suit schedule property; that defendant No.2, who is a relative of plaintiff and Ex-Member of Parliament, approached the plaintiff and requested to execute nominal sale deed in respect of land in Sy.No.521/B, admeasuring Ac.1.00 guntas out of Acs.2.24 gts, belonging to plaintiff, stating that defendant No.1 required to be in possession of Acs.40.00 guntas of land to obtain permission from AICTE to run a college; that initially, plaintiff refused, however, on repeated requests and force of defendant Nos.1 and 2, he executed a nominal sale deed vide Document No.234/2001, dated 14.05.2001, in respect of land in Sy.No.521/B, admeasuring Ac.1.00 guntas, without any consideration and delivery of possession of the land; that on the date of execution of nominal sale deed itself, a precondition was stated that the said nominal sale registered deed would not confer any right or title over the property to the defendants and the defendants agreed to cancel the said deed without fail, whenever the plaintiff demands.

3.1. It is further averred that defendants have executed an Agreement-cum-Undertaking stating that the sale deed vide Document No.234/2001 was only for the purpose of getting permission from AICTE to defendant No.1-Educational Society and admitted that no title or rights are conferred to the defendants; that in pursuance of the nominal sale deed, possession was not delivered to the defendants even after execution of nominal sale deed in favour of the defendants, the name of the plaintiff has been continuing in the revenue records and he has been in occupation and raising crop