IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AT

RAYACHOTY

0.S No. 18 /2014

1. Sowdagar Jybunnisa Begum having died
her legal representative is added as second plaintiff
2. Dr. Shaik Mahammed Abdul Razak,
The second plaintiff is added as per orders
in I.A No.397/2018 dated 13/07/2018 ... Plaintiffs
Vs.
1) The District Collector of Kadapa
2) The Municipal Commissioner of Rayachoty
3) The Fire Officer of Rayachoty
4) The Tahsildar of Rayachoty ... Defendants
CHIEF-EXAMINATION AFFIDAVIT OF PW-1 (SECOND PLAINTIFF)
FILED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFFS U/O 18 RULE 14 (1) OF C.P.C

I Dr. Shaik Mahammed Abdul Razak, S/o S.Md. Saleha, aged about
60 years, Professor, Fathima Medical College, Kadapa City, residing in the
house bearing door No.57/101-B, Battu Street, Rayachoty Town, Post &
Mandal, Kadapa District , do hereby solemnly declare and state as
follows:
1. I humbly submit that the deceased first plaintiff is my mother
and that my mother deceased first plaintiff was the absolute owner of
suit schedule property shown as ABCD in plaint rough plan. The deceased
first plaintiff got ABCD suit schedule property by virtue of a will on 15-03-
1960 executed by her mother-in-law named Khader Bi in favour of the
deceased first plaintiff on 15-03¬1960. The S.No.698 has full extent of
Acs.6.13 cents standing in the names of 1) Y.Abdul Sattar, 2) Mayana
Sofiya Bi, 3) Kamma Paladu Venkata Subbaiah and 4) Kamma Venkaiah as
owners in the Register of holdings. On 25-05-1925 Kamma Rachanna, S/o.
Kamma Venkata Subbaiah sold his 1/16th share i.e. Ac.1.02 to Gurrama
Venkatrayudu. Later that Gurram Venkatrayudu sold only half of that
extent i.e 0.51 cents in S.N0.698 to Pyneni Venkatesu on 23-07-1925
under registered sale deed No.1250/1925. Thereafter that Pyneni
Venkatesu sold that 0.51 cents in S.No.698 to Bepari Khaja Miya on 14-
05-1928 under registered sale deed No.1090/1928. Paladugu Venkataiah
filed a suit 0.S.No: 642/1928 in District Munisiff Court at Kadapa by
showing in OS.No:642/1928 plaint schedule that Bepari Khaja Miya got
1/12th share i.e 0.51 cents in S.No.698 along with other properties. That
Bepari Khaja Miya got only one daughter named Khader Bi whose
 :: 2 ::

murriage was performed with Sowdagar Kareem Miya who was blessed
with only one son named S.Md. Saleha whose marriage was performed
with Jybunnisa Begum who is the deceased first plaintiff in this suit.

2. I humbly submit that Bepari Khaja Miya orally gifted the suit
property to his only daughter named Sowdagar Khader Bi in the year
1932 on 10-08-1932 in the presence of elders named Kotividyala
Burandin and chembu Imam Sab and others and delivered the possession
of that property to his daughter named Sowdagar Khader Bi. The father
of Khader Bi named Bepari Khaja Miya died during 1934 year leaving his
entire properties to his only daughter named Sowdagar Khader Bi who
used to enjoy that property from 1932 year onwards. That Sowdagar
Khader Bi, W/o. Sowdagar Kareern Miya being the daughter of Bepari
Khaja Miya were blessed( with only one son named Sowdagar Mohamed
Saleha who lost he husband at an early age. So Sowdagar Khader Bi came
to live in the house of her son named S.Md. Saleha in Rayachoty Town
with daughter-in-law Jybunnisa Begum doing service to Khader Bee in her
last days, when she was bed ridden. Sowdagar Jybunnisa Begum is the
wife of her son named S.Md Saleha. Later that Sowdagar Khader Bi made
a will on 15-03-1960 in favour of her daughter-in-law orally Sowdagar
Jybunnisa Begum by bequeathing the suit properties as well as other
properties to Jybunnisa Begum in the presence Chinnapa Reddy Kzirnam
Khader, Subbanna, her son S.Md. Saleha and others in re-cognition of her
services rendered to her during her old age. The said Sowdagar Khader Bi
died during 1962 year in the house of her son by giving effect to that will.

3. I humbly submit the deceased first plaintiff is my mother. The

deceased first plaintiff executed registered will on 05-07-2017
bequeathing the suit schedule property and other properties in favour of
me that is myself named Dr. Shaik Mahammed Abdul Razak. The first
plaintiff died on 07-05-2018 by leaving the suit schedule property and
other properties to me i.e first plaintiff’s son named Dr. Shaik
Mahammed Abdul Razak for inheriting the suit schedule property and
other properties. So the deceased plaintiff willed away her property to
me being her son named Dr. Shaik Mahammed Abdul Razak who is
entitled for the suit property and have to conduct the suit as second
plaintiff and proceed with the suit. There is no other legal heir to the
 :: 3 ::

deceased plaintiff, except myself i.e Dr. Shaik Mahammed Abdul Razak as
per the registered will dated 05-07-2017 executed by the deceased first
plaintiff.

4. I humbly submit that the property in S.No.11/2 extent 0.78

cents belongs to my father named S.Md. Saleha who is the husband of
the deceased first plaintiff. The said S.Md. Saleha left rasta in S.No.11/2
on the northern side of suit property. The Saw mill owner Nazeer
Ahamed and Koppala Gangi Reddy, Magbool and others complained that
rasta left By S.Md Saleha was not convenient for their ingress and egress.
So that my father S.Md. Saleha closed that northern rasta in S.No.11/2
extent 0.01 cents and gave it to Zybunnisa Begum in exchange of her 0.02
cents rasta in 698 left for rasta purpose in S.No.698 which rasta starts
from Trunk raid extending to Nazeer Saw Mill Oil, Mill of Koppala Gangi
Reddy and others with the sole motive to make convenient to those
persons for egress and ingress. The deceased first plaintiff and her
husband S.Md. Saleha entered into an agreement in writing on 04-01-
1969 to that effect.

5. I humbly submit that the documents dated 25-05-1925,

23-07-1925 and 14-05¬1928 state that S.No.698 to get full extent of
Acs.6.13 which was not sub divided and that entire extent is patta land
and it is not all Government and. So the Government cannot claim even
any small extent out of Ac.6.13 cents in S.No.698 as Government land.
The deceased first plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit schedule
property since she got the suit property by virtue of will date 15-03-1960
from her mother-in-law. I being the son of the deceased first plaintiff
paid Rs.250/- on (1) 02-04-2013 to Tahsildar of Rayachoty for surveying of
S.N0.698 land and demarcating the suit schedule property belonging to
the deceased first plaintiff. The Tahsildar did not take steps for surveying
and sub-division of 0.S Ao.698 land Acs.6-13 cents for the reasons best
known to him.

6. I humbly submit that the suit property of deceased first

plaintiff shown in the suit plaint schedule is existing within the specific
boundaries mentioned in the schedule of the suit plaint. The defendants
have no right or authority over the suit schedule property of the
deceased first plaintiff. The deceased first plaintiff paid land tax to the
 :: 4 ::

revenue department for suit schedule property. The deceased first

plaintiff was enjoying the possession of the suit schedule property. The
deceased first plaintiff issued legal notice through her Advocate to the
defendants 1 to 3 on 12-05-2012 under sections 80 C.P.0 and section 369
of A.P. Municipalities act by clearly mentioning about her title and
possession over the suit schedule property. The legal notice dated 12-05-
2012 was issued to the defendants No.1 to 3 on behalf of deceased first
plaintiff for 0.50 cents. Thus the legal notice dated 12-05-2012 covers the
properties of the husband of deceased first plaintiff to the extent of 0.26
cents and the properties of deceased first plaintiff to the extent of 0.25
cents. The defendants received that legal notice, but the defendants 1
and 2 did not give any reply. The third defendant gave a reply notice
dated 22-05-2012 with false allegations by claiming the suit schedule
property. Hence, the deceased first plaintiff is forced to this suit filed
against the defendants for declaration of her title and permanent
injunction.

7. I humbly submit that the deceased first plaintiff was

possession and enjoyment of the suit property and after her death I being
the second plaintiff is enjoying the suit property. The defendants are
making efforts to knock away the suit property of the deceased first
plaintiff by hook or crook by changing their attitude by falsely and
illegally applying the powers of the defendants by violating the provisions
of law. The defendants are trying to take possession of the suit property
of the deceased first plaintiff by interfering with the title and possession
of the deceased first plaintiff.

8. I humbly submit that the deceased first plaintiff filed the

original will dated 15-03-1960 of the deceased first plaintiff in
0.S.No.13/2012 in Firth Additional District Judge Court at Rayachoty. So
the deceased first plaintiff got the original will dated 15-03-1960 and filed
it in this suit against the defendants 1 to 4 for declaration and perpetual
injunction.

9.THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS MAY KINDLY BE MARKED

ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFFS AS EXBITS A-1 TO A-17

1. EX: A-1 is Family tree of deceased first plaintiff and her husband.
 :: 5 ::
2. EX: A-2 is Rough plan of suit property.
3. EX: A-3 is Market value Certificate dated 26-07-2014 issued by the Sub-
Registrar of Rayachoty for suit survey No.698 property.
4. EX: A-4 is C.C. of record of holdings dated 15-10-2011 in two papers
relating to suit S.No.698 issued by Sub-Registrar of Rayachoty.
5. EX: A-5 is C.C.. of the sale deed No.799/1925 dated 25-05-1925
executed of Kamma Paladugu Rachaiah, cin Venkata Subbaiah in
favour of Gurram Venkatrayudu.
6. EX: A-6 is C.C. of the sale deed No.1250 of 1925 dated 23-07-1925
executed by Gurram Venkatrayudu in favour of F'yneni Venkatesu.
7. EX: A-7 is C.C. of the sale deed No.1090/1928 dated 14-05-1928
executed Pyneni Venkatesu in favour of bepari Khaja Miya.
8. EX: A-8 is Original will dated 15-03-1960 executed by Sowdagar Khader
Bi in favour of the plaintiff named Jybunnisa Begum for suit
property and other properties.
9. EX: A-9 is Copy of treasury receipt dates 02-04-2013 for paying
Rs.250/- for sub-division of suit survey No.698 for allotting suit
property to the plaintiff.
10. EX: A-10 is Original treasury receipt dated 10-05-2013 for house site
tax of Rs.200/- paid to revenue department.
11. EX: A-11 is Office copy of legal notice dated 12-05-2012 issued by the
counsel of the plaintiff Under section 80 C.P.C and Sec.369 of A.P.
Municipalities Act of 1965 to D1, D3 & D4.
12. EX: A-12 are Three postal receipts dated 12-05-2012 addressed to D-
1, D-3 & D4 for sending serial No.11 legal notice.
13. EX: A-13 are Three postal acknowledgements signed by D-1, D3 & D4
for receiving serial No.11 legal notice.
14. EX: A-14 are Two land tax receipts issued in favour of the deceased
first plaintiff by the Karanam for Phasalis 1390 to 1393 and 1378 to
1381.
15. EX: A-15 is Angeekara Patram entered between the plaintiff and her
husband S.Md. Saleha on 28-12-1968 for exchanging 0.02 cents for
the purpose of rasta.
 :: 6 ::
16. EX: A-16 is Served copy of the Reply notice dated: 22-05-2012 issued
by third defendant to the counsel of the plaintiff for the legal notice
dated: 12-05-2012.
17. EX: A-17 is C.C of will dated 05-07-2017 executed by the deceased
first plaintiff in favour of the second plaintiff for suit schedule
property and other properties.

10. PRAYER:- Therefore I pray that the Honourable Court may

be pleased to pass a decree and judgment in my favour and against the
defendants by:-

Declaring my right and title over the suit schedule property by

granting consequential permanent injunction (declaration and
consequential injunction) in my favour by restraining the defendants
and their agents from interfering with my peaceful possession and
enjoyment of the suit schedule property and grant costs of the suit and
pass such other orders as the Honourable Court deems fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.

Solemnly affirmed and signed before me on 6th day of September, 2018

at Kadapa

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED :-

C.C of will dated 05-07-2017 executed by the deceased first plaintiff in

favour of the second plaintiff for suit schedule property and other
properties.

Filed by me Advocate

ADVOCATE FOR THE PLAINTIFFS

 IN THE COURT OF THE FIFTH
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AT
RAYACHOTY
OS No: 18 /2018

1. Sowdagar Jybunnisa Begum

2. Dr. Shaik Mahammed Abdul
Razak
…Plaintiffs
Vs.

1) The District Collector of Kadapa

2) The Municipal Commissioner of
Rayachoty
3) The Fire Officer of Rayachoty
4) The Tahsildar of Rayachoty

…Dafendants

CHIEF-EXAMINATION
AFFIDAVIT OF PW-1 (SECOND
PLAINTIFF) FILED ON BEHALF
OF THE PLAINTIFFS U/O 18
RULE 14 (1) OF C.P.C

Filed by:

Sri. K. Venkata Reddy, B.Com., B.L.,

Advocate for the plaintiffs,
Kadapa