Andhra Pradesh High Court
SA/72/2026 of VEMULAPALLI VENKATA NAGESWARA RAO Vs PADMANAABHA @ VEMULAPALLI LEELAVATHI on 12 February 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3163] FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY SECOND APPEAL NO: 72/2026 Between: 1. VEMULAPALLI VENKATA NAGESWARA RAO, (DIED) 2.
APHC010024032026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
SECOND APPEAL NO: 72/2026
Between:
1. VEMULAPALLI VENKATA NAGESWARA RAO, (DIED)
2. VEMULAPALLI VENKATA CHOWDARY,, S/O. VENKATA NAGESWARA
RAO, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS , PRIVATE SERVICE, METAL
CASTINGS, 193/3, 192/8, B.2, J.R.D. TATA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AUTO NAGAR, KANURU, VIJAYAWADA.
3. VEMULAPALLI @ MUTHINENI LEKHA SRI,, W/O. MUTHINENI
VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS , HOUSE WIFE, C/O. MUTHINENI AMARESWARA RAO, D.NO. 9-386-A, SAARADA
RESIDENCY,
SANTHI
NAGAR,
MAGANTI
COLLEGE
ROAD,
GUDIVADA POST, KRISHNA DISTRICT.
4. VEMULAPALLI SATYAVANI,, W/O. LATE VENKATA NAGESWARA
RAO, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS HOUSE WIFE, R/O NEAR KONERU
PUBLIC SCHOOL, KUCHIPUDI VILLAGE,MOVVA MANDAL, KRISHNA
DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT(S)
AND
1. PADMANAABHA VEMULAPALLI LEELAVATHI, W/O PADMANABHA
SUBRAHMANYAAYYAR, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS , HOUSE WIFE, D.NO. 1-4-69/3/1, SRI LALITHA MILAYAM, STREET NO.8, LANE NO.9, HUBSIGUDA, HYDERABAD-7.
...RESPONDENT
Appeal under section 100 of CPC against orders pleased to allow the second appeal by setting aside the judgment and decree in A.S.No. 18/2025
dated 31-10-2025 on the file of Hon'ble VI Additional District Judge, Avanigadda which was passed by confirming the judgement and decree dated
CMR,J
S.A.No.72 of 2026
28-04-2023 in O.S.No.88 of 2015 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Avanigadda and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the filing of Xerox Copy of the judgment dated 28-04-2023 in O.S.No. 88 of 2015 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Avanigadda in filing the above S.A., and to pass IA NO: 2 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No. 18/2025 dated 31-10- 2025 on the file of Hon'ble VI Additional District Judge, Avanigadda and pass Counsel for the Appellant(S):
1. PILLIX LAW FIRM
Counsel for the Respondent:
1. SIREESHA RANI VALLABHANENI
The Court made the following:
CMR,J
S.A.No.72 of 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT:
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and Smt. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni, learned Counsel for the respondent, who appeared on caveat.
2. This is the second appeal preferred by the appellants against the concurrent findings of the trial court and the first appellate court assailing the impugned judgment.
3. The appellants are the defendants in the suit bearing O.S.No.88/2015 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge Court, Avanigadda. The suit was filed against the defendants by the plaintiff for declaration of his title and for recovery of possession of the plaint schedule property. The plaintiff claimed title over the suit schedule property based on a registered gift deed that have been executed by the defendants which is Ex.A1. The defendants have taken a plea in the written statement that the gift deed was executed by defendant No.1 in a drunken state and that subsequently, they have cancelled the said gift deed unilaterally. It is a settled law that when once the execution of the gift deed is admitted and if it is sought to be cancelled on any valid legal ground whether on the ground that it was obtained by playing a fraud when the executant donor is in intoxicated state of mind or any other ground, the executant has to approach the competent civil court and prove the alleged fraud played or prove the fact that it was obtained from him while he was in drunken state and then get the registered gift deed cancelled by a court of law. But without resorting to legal process by way of filing a suit for cancellation of the gift deed, as it is pleaded that it was unilaterally cancelled, it is not valid under law.
4. Therefore, both the trial court and the first appellate court recorded a finding against the defendants regarding the said plea taken by them. As the defendant No.1 has admittedly executed the gift deed in favour of the plaintiff and since the unilateral cancellation is not found to be valid under law, both the trial court and the first appellate court have recorded the concurrent finding
CMR,J S.A.No.72 of 2026
relating to declaration of title of the plaintiff in respect of the plaint schedule property. Accordingly, the trial court decreed the suit and it was upheld by the first appellate court.
5. Therefore, no valid legal ground is emanating from the record warranting interference of this Court in this second appeal. There is no substantial question of law involved in this second appeal warranting interference of this Court with the concurrent findings of both the trial court and the first appellate court. There is no apparent error of law emanating from the record to interfere with the impugned judgment of both the trial court and the first appellate court. So, there is no valid legal ground to admit the appeal even for hearing.
6. Resultantly, the Second Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
Date: 13.02.2026 Vns