HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

JUDGMENT

The present Second Appeal is filed aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree, dated 04.04.2025, passed by the Principal District Judge, Nagarkurnool District at Nagarkurnool, in AS.No.15 of 2020, whereunder and whereby the Judgment and decree dated 12.12.2019 in OS.No.176 of

2013 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Nagarkurnool, was confirmed.

2. The appellant herein is the plaintiff and the respondents herein are the defendants in the suit. For convenience, hereinafter the parties are referred to as they are arrayed in the suit.

3. The factual matrix of the case in nut-shell, which led to filing of the present Second Appeal are that plaintiff filed suit in OS.No.176 of 2013 for partition and separate possession of Agricultural lands against the defendants. In the plaint, it is averred that one Boosi Parvathalu was the Pattedar of land to an extent of Ac.9.01 guntas in Survey No.61; an extent of Ac.10.34 guntas in Survey no.62; an extent of Ac.11.35 guntas in Survey No.63, totaling to an extent of 32 acres, situated at Achampet Village and Mandal, Mahabubnagar District (herein after referred to as the ‘suit schedule property’); that the said Boosi Parvathalu died leaving behind him his daughters Sakku Bai, Padmamma, Rajamani and his only son Booshi Raja Gopal, who is the plaintiff herein, as his legal heirs; that after demise of Boosi Parvathalu the suit schedule lands were being cultivated by the plaintiff and defendants through late Pokala Muthyalu; that on 25.08.2013, when the plaintiff went to suit lands for cleaning his portion of undivided lands for agricultural purpose, defendant No.1 came to the suit lands and obstructed him from cultivating the land stating that the suit lands belongs to his father and after his death, he inherited the suit lands; that on 31.08.2013, the plaintiff approached the Tahsildar, and on verification he came to know that the name of P.Muthyalu who is the father of defendant No.1, was shown as Pattedar from the year 1980 including RoR; that the matter was referred to village elders for partition and separate possession, but defendants 1 and 2 refused for the same; and that the father of defendant No.1 who is the elder brother-in-law of plaintiff and defendants 4 to 7 colluded with revenue officials and got mutated the name of defendant No.1 in the revenue records without having any right over the suit lands. Hence, the plaintiff filed suit for specific partition and separate possession.

4. The defendant Nos.1 and 2 filed common written statement admitting the relationship between the parties as mentioned in the plaint, and contended that Boosi Parvathalu was the owner of the suit schedule properties; that the plaintiff herein i.e. Boosi Rajagopal has got landed properties i.e. Ac.31.30 guntas dry lands situated at Achampet Village and Mandal (suit schedule property); that the plaintiff sold away the said suit property in favour of Pokala Muthyalu who is the father of defendant no.1 and 3 and delivered possession; that in the year 1965, the said Pokala Muthyalu got validated the alienation made by the plaintiff in his favour, and accordingly Form No.4 under Section 50-B of the A.P.(Telangana area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 was issued to him; that since then the name of Pokala Muthyalu is mutated in the revenue records as pattedar and possessor of the suit lands; that after the death of Pokala Muthyalu, defendant Nos.1 and 2 became the owners and possessors of the suit property being the legal heirs. It is further averred that after the death of Pokala Muthyalu in the year 2005, his legal heirs i.e. defendants 1 and 2 are in possession and enjoyment of suit schedule property; that plaintiff is out of possession of the suit schedule properties since more than four decades; and that the plaintiff has not included the other joint family properties of Boosi Parvathalu as properties in the present suit for partition, as such, the suit is not