IN THE COURT OF HONBLE DISTRICT JUDGE: ONGOLE

O.S.No.

/2014

Between
Gade Chandrasekhar Reddy,
S/o Venkateswara Reddy,
Aged 46 years, business, Hindu,
R/o Gadepalem Village,
Kothapatnam Mandal,
Plaintif

Prakasam District.
And
1. Iruvuri Pitchi Reddy,
S/o Venkateswara Reddy, Hindu,
Aged about 35 years, business,
R/o Siva Prasad Colony,
Ongole.
2. Vintaa Prabhakara Reddy,
S/o Narasimha Reddy, Hindu,
Aged about 47 years, Business,
R/o Bapuji Nagar, Kavali.
3. Ethamukkala Bala Murali Reddy,
S/o Venkata Subba Reddy, Hindu,
Aged about 42 years, business,
R/o Ethamukkalavari Colony,
Kavali.
4. Kota Sundara Rami Reddy,
S/o Sesha Reddy, Hindu,
Aged about 54 years, business,
R/o Kothapalem Village,
Jaladanki Mandal,

Defendants

S.P.S.R Nellore Dt.

PLAINT FILED U/S 26 OF C.P.C ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PLAINTIFF:The plaintiff is Gade Chandrasekhar Reddy, son of Venkateswara
Reddy, Hindu, aged 46 years, business, resident of Gadepalem Village,
Kothapatnam

Mandal,

Prakasam

District,

which

is

within

the

jurisdiction of this Honble court.

Page 1 of 8

His address for service of summons is to his counsel Sri Inakollu

Venkateswarlu, N. Srinivasa Rao, Ch. Balachannaiah, Ch. Chakra
Reddy, Advocates, Ongole.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE DEFENDANTS:The 1st defendant is Iruvuri Pitchi Reddy son of Venkateswara
Reddy, Hindu, aged about 35 years, business, resident of Siva Prasad
Colony, Ongole, Prakasam District, which is with in the jurisdiction of
Junior Civil Judge, Ongole.
The 2nd defendant is Vinta Prabhakara Reddy son of Narasimha
Reddy, Hindu, aged about 47 years, business, resident of Bapuji Nagar,
Kavali, PSR Nellore District, within the jurisdiction of Junior Civil
Judge, Kavali.
The 3rd defendant is Etamukkala Bala Murali Reddy, son of
Venkata Subba Reddy, Hindu, aged about 42 years, business, resident
of Etamukkalavari Colony, Kavali, PSR Nellore District, within the
jurisdiction of Junior Civil Judge, Kavali.
The 4th defendant is Kota Sundara Rami Reddy, son of Sesha
Reddy, aged about 54 years, Hindu, business, resident of Kothapalem
Village, Jaladanki Mandal, S.P.S.R Nellore District. With in the
jurisdiction of Junior Civil Judge, Kavali.
Their address for service of summon is the same as stated above.
III. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:1. The schedule filed along with the plaint may be read as part and
parcel of this plaint.
2. The schedule property is the absolute property of the defendants
having purchased the same under a regd. Sale deed no.
2176/2008 dt. 28/09/2008.
3. The defendants offered to sell the schedule property. The plaintiff
agreed to purchase the same. The bargain was settled at
Rs.7,09,000/- (Seven Lakhs Nine Thousand Rupees) per acre.

Page 2 of 8

That on 18/07/2011 the plaintiff paid an amount of Rs.

70,00,000/- (Seventy Lakhs Rupees) towards advance, the
balance amount is payable after showing the measurements of
the schedule property thought a surveyor proportionately to the
extent derived at after

the measurements before 31/10/2011

and the defendants agreed to execute the regd. Sale deed either in
favor of the plaintiff or on the name of the authorized person of
the plaintiff. On the same day incorporating all the terms and
conditions the defendants executed an agreement of sale in favor
of the plaintiff. It was further agreed by the defendants that they
will get the Revenue records updated on their names and produce
the same by the date of registration.
4. The plaintiff is always ready with the amount and requested the
defendants to show the measurements of the schedule property
through a surveyor and produce the Revenue records his name
since the name of the defendants are not find place in the
Revenue records. The plaintiff always expressed his ready and
willingness to obtain the regd. Sale deed by paying the balance of
sale consideration for the extent derived at after the measurement
of the schedule property. But the defendants postponed the same
on one pretext or the other for the best reasons known to them by
enjoying the huge amount of money belongs to the plaintiff.
5. The plaintiff got issued a legal notice dt.31/01/2014 demanding
the defendants to show the measurements of the schedule
property and produce the Revenue records. The defendants
received the said notice. The defendants got issued a reply notice
dt. 20/02/2014 through their advocate with all false allegations
Page 3 of 8

alleged that the advance amount is forfeited and the agreement

sale executed by them is stands cancelled. Again on 20/03/2014
the defendants got issued another notice alleging that the
agreement of sale is cancelled, the advance amount is forfeited
and they got every right to alienate the schedule property to any
3rd parties. All the averments in the reply notices dt. 20/02/2014
and 20/03/2014 got issued by the defendants are all false. The
contents in the reply notices issued by the defendants are
explicitly denoting that the defendants are un-willing and they are
not ready to show the measurements of the schedule property.
The defendants are the faulty party. The names of the defendants
are not mutated in the Revenue records. Instead of fulfilling the
obligation on their part, the defendants got issued the reply
notices with false averments. To avoid the execution of the sale
deed, the defendants invented the theory of forfeiture of the
advance amount and cancellation of the agreement.
6. The plaintiff is always ready and willing to obtain the sale deed
from

the

defendants

with

the

balance

amount

of

sale

consideration and the defendants failed to fulfill their obligation

and thereby the defendants are faulty party.
7. The plaintiff has not filed any suit with the similar relief with
respect to the schedule property against the defendants, nor
pending in either court of law.
8. There is no collusion in between the plaintiff and defendants.
IV.
CAUSE OF ACTION:Cause of action for filing the suit on 18/07/2011
when the plaintiff entered into an agreement of sale with the
defendants; paid Rs. 70,00,000/- ( Seventy Lakhs Rupees) to the

Page 4 of 8

defendants

and when the defendants failed

to show

the

measurements of the schedule property before 31/10/2013 as

per the terms of the agreement dt. 18/07/2011 and when the
plaintiff is always ready and willing with the amount and
demanded the defendants to show the measurements of the
schedule property and to receive the balance of sale consideration
and execute the sale deed; when the defendants failed to fulfill
their part of obligation under the agreement and postponed to
show the measurements of the schedule property on one pretext
or the other; and on 31/01/2014 when the plaintiff got issued a
notice to the defendants ; on 20/02/2014 and on 20/03/2014
when the defendants got

issued

reply notices

with false

allegations; the schedule property is situated in Chejarla Village

of Ammanabrolu Sub Registration in Kothapatnam Mandal which
is within the jurisdiction of this Honble court.
V.
VALUATION & COURT FEE:For the purpose of Valuation and court fee, this being the
suit

for

specific

performance

of

agreement

of

sale

dt.

18/07/2011, the suit is valued as hereunder

The Value of the schedule property as per the agreement is
Ac.39.44 cents at the rate of Rs.7,09,000/-( Seven Lakhs Nine
Thousand Rupees) per acre is Rs. 2,79,62,960/- (Two Crores
Seventy Nine Lakhs Sixty Two Thousand Nine Hundred And Sixty
Rupees) on which a court fee of Rs.2,82,126/- (Two Lakhs Eighty
Two Thousand One Hundred And Twenty Six Rupees) is herewith
paid U/s 39 of APCF & SV Act, 1956 and the same is paid in the

Page 5 of 8

account

in

court

street

branch,

Ongole

vide

challan

dt.

02/04/2014.
Alternative relief is valued as here under:
The advance amount paid under the agreement is Rs.
70,00,000/-. Interest on the 70,00,000/- from 18/07/2011 to
01/04/2014 at Rs.2/- is 45,40,685 (Forty Five lakhs Forty
Thousand and Six Hundred and Eighty Five Rupees). Total
amount is Rs.1,15,40,658/- (One Crore Fifteen lakhs forty
thousand and Six Hundred and Fifty Eight rupees only.)
As the court fee is paid for the main relief, no court fee need
to be paid separately for the alternative relief of refund of the
earnest money which is less than the value of the main relief.
The value for the purpose of jurisdiction is the same.
VI.
PRAYER:The plaintiff, therefore, prays that this Honble court may
be pleased to pass a decree in his favour against the defendants
a) For specific performance of the contract of sale dt.
18/07/2011 directing the defendants to execute a regd. Sale
deed in favour of the plaintiff at his expenses in terms of the
agreement of sale dt. 18/07/2011 and if the defendants failed
to do so, the Honble court may itself execute a regular regd.
Sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the schedule
property on behalf of the defendants.
b) Alternatively for refund of earnest money with interest i.e., Rs.
1,15,40,658/- (One Crore Fifteen lakhs forty thousand and Six
Hundred

and

Fifty

Eight

rupees

only)

together

with

subsequent interest at the rate of 24% from the date of filing of

the suit till the date of realization.

Page 6 of 8

c) For costs of the suit

d) and relief for such other and further relief as the Honble court
deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case in the
interest of justice.
Advocate for plaintif
Plaintif
All the averments mentioned above are true to the best of
my knowledge, belief and information.
Ongole,
Date: 02/04/2014

Plaintif

LIST OF DOCUMENTS:1. Agreement of sale dt. 18/07/2011 executed by the defendants in

favour of the plaintiff.
2. Office copy of Legal notice dt. 31/01/2014 issued by the plaintiff.
3. Reply notices dt. 20/02/2014 & 20/03/2014 issued by the
defendants.
Advocate for Plaintif

IN THE COURT OF HONBLE DISTRICT JUDGE: ONGOLE

O.S.No.

/2014

Page 7 of 8

Gade Chandrasekhar Reddy

Plaintiff
And

Iruvuri Pitchireddy & others

..Defendant

SCHEDULE FILED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

Prakasam District- Ammanabrolu Sub Registration- Chejarla
Grampanchayat- Chejarla Village- Sy.No. 293 an extent of Ac. 8-22
cents, Sy.No. 326 an extent of Ac.8.03 cents, Sy.No. 327 an extent of Ac.
9.60 cents and Sy.No. 328 an extent of Ac. 13.59 cents- the total extent
of Ac.39-44 cents or 15-961 hects within the following boundaries:East: Land belongs to Chejarla Govindarao
South: Sankar Donka
West: Land belongs to Tammanaboina Srinivasa Rao and E.
Venkaiah.
North: Land belongs to Gade Venkateswara Reddy.

Advocate for Plaintif

Plaintif

All the facts stated above are true to the best of my knowledge,
belief and information.
Ongole,
Date: 02/04/2014

Plaintif

Page 8 of 8