THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY APPEAL SUIT No.272 of 2014 Dated: 20.06.2014 Between:
Mr. Jagdish Prakash Vijaywargi .. Appellant and Narayandas Jhawar and others .. Respondents Counsel for the appellant: Mr. D. Narendar Naik For Mr. T. Bala Mohan Reddy Counsel for Respondent No.1: Mr. Damodar Mundra The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT:
At the interlocutory stage, the appeal is heard and being disposed of with the consent of the counsel for both parties.
This appeal arises out of order dated 03.06.2013 in E.A.No.201 of 2011 in E.P.No.21 of 2009 in O.S.No.11 of 2003 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Ranga Reddy District.
The appellant has filed E.A.No.201 of 2011 for declaring him as the owner of 0.10 guntas each in Sy.Nos.172/A and 173/B situated at Gaganpahad Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, which was claimed to have been settled in his favour by way of Ex.A1- gift settlement deed dated 27.06.2007 by respondent No.3. The claim petition was dismissed by the lower Court.
At the hearing, Mr. Narendar Naik, learned counsel for the appellant, stated that the limited relief sought by his client in this appeal is to segregate the extent of 0.20 guntas in Sy.Nos.172/A and 173/B, which was allegedly gifted to his client, from the extent of 400 square yards, which is directed to be sold for recovering the decretal amount. He has further stated that the gift settlement deed contains the specific boundaries of 0.10 guntas each in Sy.Nos.172/A and 173/B and that, therefore, the same is easily identifiable for exclusion from sale.
Mr. Damodar Mundra, learned counsel for respondent No.1, fairly stated that his client has no objection for segregating the land claimed by the appellant, as covered by Ex.A1-gift settlement deed, from the property sought to be auctioned. He has, however, stated that while identifying the extent of 400 square yards, the front portion belonging to respondent No.3-judgment debtor may be put to auction. The learned counsel for the appellant stated that he has no objection for the same.
In the light of the above noted submissions of the counsel, the appeal is disposed of by directing that the extent of 0.10 guntas each in Sy.Nos.172/A and 173/B covered by Ex.A1-gift settlement deed shall be segregated from the extent of 400 square yards, which is sought to be sold for recovery of the decretal amount. It is also directed that while identifying the extent of 400 square yards belonging to respondent No.3, the front portion of the property shall be put to sale.
As a sequel to disposal of the appeal, A.S.M.P.No.1071 of 2014 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 20th June, 2014 IBL