whether Smt. Lakshmi is a fictitious person or not. If she is not a fictitious person, she would be in the region of about 97 years of age and we have no idea whether she is still alive. Similarly, we have no idea whether Shri V. Sreeramulu, her General Power of Attorney is alive or not since no one has put in appearance on their behalf. Prima facie , on going through the records of the case and after hearing learned counsel for the parties, it does appear to us that Smt. Lakshmi was a fictitious person. Even her General Power of Attorney Shri V. Sreeramulu could not produce her as is evident from the proceedings for contempt being CCC (Criminal) No.12 of 2006. Under the circumstances, since it appears that the civil suit filed by Smt. Lakshmi being a non-existent person was based on a complete fraud, the decree granted in her favour is set aside.

1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1303 OF 2008

ST. ANN�S EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ...APPELLANT(s)
                           VERSUS
LAKSHMI & ANR. ...RESPONDENT(s)
O R D E R
  We   have   heard   learned   counsel   for   the   parties   in
respect   of   the   impugned   judgment   and   order   dated   20 th
January,   2004   passed   by   a   learned   Single   Judge   of   the
Karnataka High Court in RFA No.846 of 1999 as well as the
order  dated  22 nd
  November,  2005  in  Review  Petition  No.510
of 2005.
  The proceedings arise out of a civil suit having been
filed   by   Smt.   Lakshmi   through   her   General   Power   of
Attorney, Shri V. Sreeramulu.
  One   of   the   issues   framed   in   the   civil   suit   was
whether   Smt.   Lakshmi   is   a   fictitious   person   or   not.
There was no final determination in this regard either by
the   Trial   Court   or   by   the   First   Appellate   Court   (High
Court).
  As   far   as   the   present   appeal   is   concerned,   it   may
only   be   stated   that   the   suit   was   for   a   decree   seeking
permanent   injunction   against   the   appellant   (St.   Ann�s
Educational   Society)   in   respect   of   10   acres   of   land   in

2
Survey   No.27   in   Village   Kowdenahalli,   Bangalore.     While
the   civil   suit   filed   by   Smt.   Lakshmi   was   dismissed,   the
First   Appellate   Court   (High   Court)   decreed   the   suit   in
her favour.
  It is under these circumstances that the appellant is
now before us.
  In   the   present   appeal,   Smt.   Lakshmi   has   been   served
through her General Power of Attorney Shri V. Sreeramulu.
Neither of them has put in appearance in this Court.  
  When   Smt.   Lakshmi   filed   the   suit,   she   was   about   60
years of age in 1989.  In the normal course, Smt. Lakshmi
would now be about 97 years of age.
  As   far   as   Shri   V.   Sreeramulu   is   concerned,   he   was
about   80   years   of   age   when   certain   proceedings   for
contempt   being   CCC   (Criminal)   No.12   of   2006   were
initiated   against   him   by   the   Karnataka   High   Court   in
2009.   He would, therefore, be in the region of 87 years
of age today.
  We   have  no   idea  whether   Smt.  Lakshmi   is  a   fictitious
person   or   not.     If   she   is   not   a   fictitious   person,   she
would   be   in   the   region   of   about   97   years   of   age   and   we
have no idea whether she is still alive.  
  Similarly,   we   have   no   idea   whether   Shri   V.
Sreeramulu, her General Power of Attorney is alive or not
since no one has put in appearance on their behalf.

3
  Prima facie , on going through the records of the case
and   after   hearing   learned   counsel   for   the   parties,   it
does   appear   to   us   that   Smt.   Lakshmi   was   a   fictitious
person.     Even   her   General   Power   of   Attorney   Shri   V.
Sreeramulu   could   not   produce   her   as   is   evident   from   the
proceedings   for   contempt   being   CCC   (Criminal)   No.12   of
2006.
  Under   the   circumstances,   since   it   appears   that   the
civil   suit   filed   by   Smt.   Lakshmi   being   a   non-existent
person  was  based  on  a  complete  fraud,  the  decree  granted
in her favour is set aside.
  We may note that insofar as the grant of the land to
the   appellant   is   concerned,   that   has   been   found   against
the   appellant   right   up   to   this   Court   in   SLP(C)   No.1519-
1520 of 2003 decided on 31 st
 March, 2003.
  We are informed that the appellant has preferred some
writ   petition   which   is   pending   in   the   Karnataka   High
Court   being   W.P.   No.23158   of   2008.     We   do   not   make   any
comment   or   any   observations   with   regard   to   these
proceedings. 
  It   is   also   brought   to   our   notice   by   learned   counsel
for the appellant that the civil suit being OS No.4709 of
2010   has   been   filed   by   the   appellant   in   the   City   Civil
Court,   Bangalore   for   relief   of   permanent   injunction
restraining   the   State   of   Karnataka   from   interfering   with
the appellant�s possession of the suit scheduled property

4
without following due process of law.
  It   is   submitted   that   an   injunction   has   been   granted
in favour of the appellant on 1 st
 October, 2011.
  In   this   context,   we   may   note   that   all   proceedings
with   regard   to   the   grant   of   the   land   to   the   appellant
have   attained   finality   against   the   appellant   by   the
dismissal   of     SLP(C)   No.1519-1520   of   2003   filed   by   the
appellant in this Court.
  This may be taken note of by the High Court and Civil
Court as well.
  The appeal stands disposed of.


.............................J.
  (MADAN B. LOKUR)
.............................J.
  (DEEPAK GUPTA)
NEW DELHI
JANUARY 23, 2018

5
ITEM NO.102               COURT NO.4               SECTION IV-A
               S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal  No(s).1303/2008
ST. ANN�S EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY                      Appellant(s)
                                VERSUS
LAKSHMI & ANR.                                     Respondent(s)
Date : 23-01-2018 This appeal was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
For Appellant(s) Mr. Raju Ramachandran, Sr. Adv.
Mr. K. Parameshwar, Adv.
Mr. George Thomas, Adv.
Mr. R. Sathish, AOR
Hamsini Shankar, Adv.
Mr. Ishwar Mohanty, Adv.
                 
For Respondent(s)
                   Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR
Mr. Parikshit P. Angadi, Adv.
Mr. Md. Apzal Ansari, Adv.
As per appearance slip
                   
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                               O R D E R
The appeal stands disposed of.
  Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
  (SANJAY KUMAR-I)                 (KAILASH CHANDER)
     AR-CUM-PS                          COURT MASTER
(Signed order is placed on the file)