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)