1
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT CHIRALA, IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT CHIRALA,
Present : Sri S. Krishnan Kutty,Present : Sri S. Krishnan Kutty,
Senior Civil Judge, Chirala.Senior Civil Judge, Chirala.
Tuesday, the 16thTuesday, the 16th day of June, 2020 day of June, 2020
Original Suit No.36/2011 Original Suit No.36/2011
1. Naralasetty Lakshmikanthamma (DIED) by L.Rs.1.Naralasetty Lakshmikanthamma (DIED) by L.Rs.
2. Naralasetty Nageswara Rao S/o.Venkata Swamy,2.Naralasetty Nageswara Rao S/o.Venkata Swamy, Hindu, age 75 years, Agriculture,Hindu, age 75 years, Agriculture, R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.
3. Naralasetty Srinivasa Rao S/o.Nageswara Rao,3.Naralasetty Srinivasa Rao S/o.Nageswara Rao, Hindu, age 52 years, Agriculture,Hindu, age 52 years, Agriculture, R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.
4. Naralasetty Ramabrahmam S/o.Nageswara Rao,4.Naralasetty Ramabrahmam S/o.Nageswara Rao, Hindu, age 51 years, Employee,Hindu, age 51 years, Employee, R/o.D.No.219/31G, 2ndR/o.D.No.219/31G, 2nd line, Pasuputhota, line, Pasuputhota, Maduranagar, Vijayawada.Maduranagar, Vijayawada.
5. Naralasetty Satyanarayana S/o.Nageswara Rao,5.Naralasetty Satyanarayana S/o.Nageswara Rao, Hindu, age 48 years, Employee,Hindu, age 48 years, Employee, R/o.D.No.2111174, Reserve Line, Police Quarters,R/o.D.No.2111174, Reserve Line, Police Quarters, Kakinada, East Godawari District.Kakinada, East Godawari District.
6. Rajendraprasad Sumati W/o.Rajendra Prasad,6.Rajendraprasad Sumati W/o.Rajendra Prasad, age 45 years, Hindu, Housewife,age 45 years, Hindu, Housewife, R/o.D.No.145/2, 4thR/o.D.No.145/2, 4th street, ICF West Colony, street, ICF West Colony, Chennai.Chennai.
7. Naralasetty Seetaramadevi D/o.Nageswara Rao,7.Naralasetty Seetaramadevi D/o.Nageswara Rao, age 42 years, Hindu, Housewife,age 42 years, Hindu, Housewife, R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.
8. Sikharam Hymavathi W/o.Srinivasarao,8.Sikharam Hymavathi W/o.Srinivasarao, Hindu, age 39 years, Housewife,Hindu, age 39 years, Housewife, R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal. Plaintiff Nos.2 to 8 are added as L.Rs of 1stst plaintiffPlaintiff Nos.2 to 8 are added as L.Rs of 1 plaintiff as per orders in I.A.No.822/2013 dated 26.06.2014.as per orders in I.A.No.822/2013 dated 26.06.2014.
.....Plaintiffs .....Plaintiffs
V/sV/s
1. Anumalasetty Venkateswarlu (DIED) by L.Rs.1.Anumalasetty Venkateswarlu (DIED) by L.Rs.
2. Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi W/o.late Subbarao,2.Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi W/o.late Subbarao, Hindu, Housewife, aged about 60 years,Hindu, Housewife, aged about 60 years, R/o.Anumallipet village, Vetapalem Mandal.R/o.Anumallipet village, Vetapalem Mandal.
3. Anumalasetty Ramesh alias Raghavulu,3.Anumalasetty Ramesh alias Raghavulu, S/o.late Subbarao, Employee, aged about 35 years,S/o.late Subbarao, Employee, aged about 35 years, R/o.C/o.Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi, Anumallipet R/o.C/o.Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi, Anumallipet village, Vetapalem Mandal.village, Vetapalem Mandal.
4. Naralasetty Ganga Bhavani W/o.Srinivasarao,4.Naralasetty Ganga Bhavani W/o.Srinivasarao, age 45 years, Hindu, Housewife R/o.Sopiralaage 45 years, Hindu, Housewife R/o.Sopirala Village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.Village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.
5. Nunna Umamaheswari W/o.Purnachandra Rao,5.Nunna Umamaheswari W/o.Purnachandra Rao, aged about 40 years, Hindu, Housewife,aged about 40 years, Hindu, Housewife, R/o.C/o.Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi, Anumallipet R/o.C/o.Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi, Anumallipet village, Vetapalem Mandal.village, Vetapalem Mandal.
6. Anumalasetty Subbarayudu (DIED) by L.Rs.6.Anumalasetty Subbarayudu (DIED) by L.Rs.
7. Anumalasetty Sridevi W/o.late Venkateswarlu,7.Anumalasetty Sridevi W/o.late Venkateswarlu, aged about 67 years, Hindu, Housewife,aged about 67 years, Hindu, Housewife, R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.
2
8. Anumalasetty Pandurangarao S/o.late Venkateswarlu,8.Anumalasetty Pandurangarao S/o.late Venkateswarlu, aged about 56 years, Hindu, Housewife,aged about 56 years, Hindu, Housewife, R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.
9. Banala alias Anumalasetty Annapurna,9.Banala alias Anumalasetty Annapurna, D/o.late Venkateswarlu, aged about 50 years,D/o.late Venkateswarlu, aged about 50 years, Hindu, Housewife, R/o.Sopirala village, Hindu, Housewife, R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.Chinnaganjam Mandal. Defendant Nos.7 to 9 are added as L.Rs of the deceasedDefendant Nos.7 to 9 are added as L.Rs of the deceased 11stst defendant as per orders in I.A.No.1865/12 defendant as per orders in I.A.No.1865/12
dated 29.12.2014.dated 29.12.2014.
10. Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi,10.Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi, W/o.late Subbarayudu, aged about 60 years, W/o.late Subbarayudu, aged about 60 years, Hindu, Housewife.Hindu, Housewife.
11. Anumalasetty Venkateswara Rao,11.Anumalasetty Venkateswara Rao, S/o.late Subbarayudu, aged about 35 years, Hindu.S/o.late Subbarayudu, aged about 35 years, Hindu.
12. Anumalasetty Srinivasarao S/o.late Subbarayudu,12.Anumalasetty Srinivasarao S/o.late Subbarayudu, aged about 33 years, Hindu.aged about 33 years, Hindu.
13. Anumalasetty Ramasubbarao S/o.late Subbarayudu,13.Anumalasetty Ramasubbarao S/o.late Subbarayudu, aged about 30 years, Hindu.aged about 30 years, Hindu. Defendant Nos.10 to 13 are R/o.D.No.15364/1/3, Defendant Nos.10 to 13 are R/o.D.No.15364/1/3, Plot No.69/B, near Om Kirana Shop, Suryanagar Colony, Plot No.69/B, near Om Kirana Shop, Suryanagar Colony, Indian Gas Godown Area, Kallu Compound, Indian Gas Godown Area, Kallu Compound, Old Alwal, Hyderabad.Old Alwal, Hyderabad.
14. Pallapolu Padma W/o.Venkata Rao, age 38 years,14.Pallapolu Padma W/o.Venkata Rao, age 38 years, Hindu, Housewife R/o.D.No.156/D, RailwayHindu, Housewife R/o.D.No.156/D, Railway Quarters, Satyanarayanapuram Railway Colony,Quarters, Satyanarayanapuram Railway Colony, Vijayawada.Vijayawada. Defendant Nos.10 to 14 are added as L.Rs of the deceasedDefendant Nos.10 to 14 are added as L.Rs of the deceased defendant No.6 as per orders in I.A.No.922/2015defendant No.6 as per orders in I.A.No.922/2015
dated 29.01.2018.dated 29.01.2018.
…..Defendants …..Defendants
This suit is coming on 04.03.2020 before me for final hearing in the presenceThis suit is coming on 04.03.2020 before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri N.Rajuof Sri N.Raju, Advocate for the Plaintiffs and of , Advocate for the Plaintiffs and of Sri K.S.S.Prasad, Sri K.S.S.Prasad, Advocate for Advocate for defendant Nos.2 to 5 and of Sri T.Srikanth, defendant Nos.2 to 5 and of Sri T.Srikanth, Advocate for defendant No.8 andAdvocate for defendant No.8 and defendant Nos.7, 9, 10 to 14 having remained exparte and defendant Nos.1 and 6defendant Nos.7, 9, 10 to 14 having remained exparte and defendant Nos.1 and 6 died; and on careful perusal of material available on record and on hearing on bothdied; and on careful perusal of material available on record and on hearing on both the side and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court deliveredthe side and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:the following:
// J U D G M E N T // // J U D G M E N T //
1.1.The suit is filed for partition of plaint schedule properties into fourThe suit is filed for partition of plaint schedule properties into four equal shares and allot one such share to the plaintiff, and for costs.equal shares and allot one such share to the plaintiff, and for costs.
2.2.The brief averments of the plaint are as follows:The brief averments of the plaint are as follows:
The plaintiff submits that, Defendant Nos.1 and 6 are the plaintiff’sThe plaintiff submits that, Defendant Nos.1 and 6 are the plaintiff’s elder and younger brothers, defendant No.2 is the wife of plaintiff’s late brotherelder and younger brothers, defendant No.2 is the wife of plaintiff’s late brother
Anumalasetty Subba Rao, defendant Nos.3 to 5 are the children of defendant No.2;Anumalasetty Subba Rao, defendant Nos.3 to 5 are the children of defendant No.2; the plaintiff, defendant No.1, 6 and late husband of defendant No.2 are the childrenthe plaintiff, defendant No.1, 6 and late husband of defendant No.2 are the children of late Anumalasetty Raghavulu and his wife late Ratnamma. The plaintiff submitsof late Anumalasetty Raghavulu and his wife late Ratnamma. The plaintiff submits 3 that, the plaint schedule properties devolved on their father Anumalasettythat, the plaint schedule properties devolved on their father Anumalasetty
Raghavulu from his ancestors. The plaintiff submits that, their father AnumalaseetyRaghavulu from his ancestors. The plaintiff submits that, their father Anumalaseety
Raghavulu died intestate and that plaintiff, defendant Nos.1 to 6 are in joint andRaghavulu died intestate and that plaintiff, defendant Nos.1 to 6 are in joint and constructive possession of plaint schedule properties, as such plaintiff and herconstructive possession of plaint schedule properties, as such plaintiff and her brothers defendant Nos.1 and 6 and defendant Nos.2 to 5 being the legal heirs ofbrothers defendant Nos.1 and 6 and defendant Nos.2 to 5 being the legal heirs of plaintiff’s late brother Anumalasetty Subba Rao, have got ¼thplaintiff’s late brother Anumalasetty Subba Rao, have got ¼th share each in the share each in the plaint schedule properties. Inspite of requests made by the plaintiff, defendantplaint schedule properties. Inspite of requests made by the plaintiff, defendant
Nos.1, 2 and 6 are postponing the partition of plaint schedule properties on someNos.1, 2 and 6 are postponing the partition of plaint schedule properties on some pretext or other. In the meantime the wife of defendant No.1 namely Anumalasettypretext or other. In the meantime the wife of defendant No.1 namely Anumalasetty
Sridevi colluded with some of the defendants created a registered partition deedSridevi colluded with some of the defendants created a registered partition deed with respect to item No.4 of plaint schedule property with a view to defeat thewith respect to item No.4 of plaint schedule property with a view to defeat the legitimate share of the plaintiff, and that the same is not binding on the plaintiff. Inlegitimate share of the plaintiff, and that the same is not binding on the plaintiff. In the said circumstances, the plaintiff is constrained to file the suit for partition ofthe said circumstances, the plaintiff is constrained to file the suit for partition of item Nos.1 to 5 of plaint schedule properties into 4 equal shares and allot one suchitem Nos.1 to 5 of plaint schedule properties into 4 equal shares and allot one such share to her.share to her.
3.3.The brief averments of the written statement filed by defendant No.1The brief averments of the written statement filed by defendant No.1 and adopted by defendant Nos.6 are as follows;and adopted by defendant Nos.6 are as follows;
Defendant No.1 submits that, except the relationship between theDefendant No.1 submits that, except the relationship between the parties in the suit the other allegations mentioned in the plaint are false andparties in the suit the other allegations mentioned in the plaint are false and invented for the purpose of filing this vexatious and frivolous suit by the plaintiff forinvented for the purpose of filing this vexatious and frivolous suit by the plaintiff for illegal gain. The defendant No.1 submits that, the plaintiff is his younger sister andillegal gain. The defendant No.1 submits that, the plaintiff is his younger sister and her marriage was taken place about 55 years back. At the time of marriage of theher marriage was taken place about 55 years back. At the time of marriage of the plaintiff and after the marriage of the plaintiff she has taken away her share ofplaintiff and after the marriage of the plaintiff she has taken away her share of property and the same were sold away by her and enjoyed the fruits of the same.property and the same were sold away by her and enjoyed the fruits of the same.
Due to escalation of price of the lands the plaintiff got eyesore over the plaintDue to escalation of price of the lands the plaintiff got eyesore over the plaint schedule properties and colluded with the defendant Nos.2 to 5 filed the unjust suitschedule properties and colluded with the defendant Nos.2 to 5 filed the unjust suit against the defendant No.1 and others so as to get illegal gain and also to harass theagainst the defendant No.1 and others so as to get illegal gain and also to harass the defendant No.1. The plaintiff as well as defendant Nos.2 to 5 sold away their sharedefendant No.1. The plaintiff as well as defendant Nos.2 to 5 sold away their share of properties to one Madasu Krishna Murthy of Pulavaripalem, Nunnaof properties to one Madasu Krishna Murthy of Pulavaripalem, Nunna 4
Satyanarayana of Chinnaganjam village and Tummalapenta Raghavaiah ofSatyanarayana of Chinnaganjam village and Tummalapenta Raghavaiah of
Chinnaganjam village and enjoyed the same for their daughters marriages. There isChinnaganjam village and enjoyed the same for their daughters marriages. There is no undivided joint family properties as stated in the plaint. As such the plaintiffno undivided joint family properties as stated in the plaint. As such the plaintiff and defendant Nos.2 to 5 have got no right in the plaint schedule properties. Theand defendant Nos.2 to 5 have got no right in the plaint schedule properties. The 11stst defendant further submits that the plaintiff has not shown the entire properties defendant further submits that the plaintiff has not shown the entire properties of their father and mother in the plaint schedule, as such the suit is hit by partialof their father and mother in the plaint schedule, as such the suit is hit by partial partition. Accordingly, praying to dismiss the suit with exploratory costs. partition. Accordingly, praying to dismiss the suit with exploratory costs.
4.4.The brief averments of the written statement filed by defendant Nos.2The brief averments of the written statement filed by defendant Nos.2 to 5 are as follows;to 5 are as follows;
Defendant Nos.2 to 5 submit that, plaint schedule properties are theDefendant Nos.2 to 5 submit that, plaint schedule properties are the ancestral properties of plaintiff and the defendants. Plaintiff has correctly filed theancestral properties of plaintiff and the defendants. Plaintiff has correctly filed the suit for partition of plaint schedule properties into 4 equal shares. The averments ofsuit for partition of plaint schedule properties into 4 equal shares. The averments of the plaint are true and correct and the plaint schedule properties are to bethe plaint are true and correct and the plaint schedule properties are to be partitioned into 4 equal shares. Defendant Nos.2 to 5 further submit that, sincepartitioned into 4 equal shares. Defendant Nos.2 to 5 further submit that, since long time the defendant No.2 demanded the plaintiff, defendant No.1 and 6 forlong time the defendant No.2 demanded the plaintiff, defendant No.1 and 6 for partition of plaint schedule properties into 4 equal shares and allot their ¼thpartition of plaint schedule properties into 4 equal shares and allot their ¼th share, share, but they postponed the same on some pretext or other with malafide intention tobut they postponed the same on some pretext or other with malafide intention to defraud the rights of them. Defendant Nos.1 and 6 colluded with each other anddefraud the rights of them. Defendant Nos.1 and 6 colluded with each other and has not cooperated for amicable partition of plaint schedule properties.has not cooperated for amicable partition of plaint schedule properties.
Accordingly, praying to decree the suit with costs.Accordingly, praying to decree the suit with costs.
5.5.During the pendency of the suit, the sole plaintiff namely NaralasettyDuring the pendency of the suit, the sole plaintiff namely Naralasetty
Lakshmikanthamma died, hence her LRs were added as plaintiff Nos.2 to 8;Lakshmikanthamma died, hence her LRs were added as plaintiff Nos.2 to 8; defendant No.1 died leaving behind his LRs defendant Nos.7 to 9; and defendantdefendant No.1 died leaving behind his LRs defendant Nos.7 to 9; and defendant
No.6 died leaving his LRs defendant Nos.10 to 14.No.6 died leaving his LRs defendant Nos.10 to 14.
6.6.Defendant Nos.7, 9, 10 to 14 remained exparte. Defendant No.8Defendant Nos.7, 9, 10 to 14 remained exparte. Defendant No.8 reported no additional written statement.reported no additional written statement.
7.7.The following issues were framed for trial.The following issues were framed for trial.
1 Whether all the joint family properties of the plaintiffs and
defendants are not added in the suit for partition as contended
by defendant No.1?
5
2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled for partition of suit properties as
prayed for?
3 To what relief?
8.8.From the plaintiff side, P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and Ex.A.1From the plaintiff side, P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined and Ex.A.1 was marked. On behalf of the defendants side, nobody was examined and nothingwas marked. On behalf of the defendants side, nobody was examined and nothing was marked.was marked.
9.9.Heard both side. Perused the records.Heard both side. Perused the records.
10.10.Issue No.1::Issue No.1
One of the contentions of the contesting defendant Nos.1 and 6 isOne of the contentions of the contesting defendant Nos.1 and 6 is that, all of their joint family properties are not shown in the plaint for partition,that, all of their joint family properties are not shown in the plaint for partition, hence the suit filed by the plaintiff for partition is not maintainable on the groundhence the suit filed by the plaintiff for partition is not maintainable on the ground of partial partition. However, to substantiate the said contention the defendantsof partial partition. However, to substantiate the said contention the defendants neither adduced any oral or documentary evidence; even none of the defendantsneither adduced any oral or documentary evidence; even none of the defendants entered the witness box to give evidence in support of their said contention.entered the witness box to give evidence in support of their said contention.
Moreover, nothing worthful was brought out through the cross examination ofMoreover, nothing worthful was brought out through the cross examination of plaintiff side witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2 so as to show that all the joint familyplaintiff side witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2 so as to show that all the joint family properties of the plaintiff and the defendants are not shown in the suit by theproperties of the plaintiff and the defendants are not shown in the suit by the plaintiff. In the said circumstances, this court is of the opinion that the defendantsplaintiff. In the said circumstances, this court is of the opinion that the defendants have failed to substantiate their contention that all the joint family properties of thehave failed to substantiate their contention that all the joint family properties of the plaintiffs and the defendants are not shown in the plaint for partition and that theplaintiffs and the defendants are not shown in the plaint for partition and that the suit is hit by partial partition. Accordingly, issue No.1 is decided against thesuit is hit by partial partition. Accordingly, issue No.1 is decided against the defendants and in favour of the plaintiffs.defendants and in favour of the plaintiffs.
11.11.Issue No.2::Issue No.2
The submission of the plaintiff is that, she is the daughter, defendantThe submission of the plaintiff is that, she is the daughter, defendant
Nos.1 and 6 are the sons and defendant Nos.2 to 5 are the legal representatives ofNos.1 and 6 are the sons and defendant Nos.2 to 5 are the legal representatives of the late son namely Subbarao, of Anumalasetty Raghavulu and Rathamma; thethe late son namely Subbarao, of Anumalasetty Raghavulu and Rathamma; the plaint schedule properties are the ancestral properties of plaintiff’s fatherplaint schedule properties are the ancestral properties of plaintiff’s father
Anumalasetty Raghavulu. The submission of the plaintiff further shows that theirAnumalasetty Raghavulu. The submission of the plaintiff further shows that their father and mother namely Anumalasetty Raghavulu and Rathamma died intestate;father and mother namely Anumalasetty Raghavulu and Rathamma died intestate; 6 thereafter plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 and 6 are in joint and constructivethereafter plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 and 6 are in joint and constructive possession of plaint schedule properties; since defendant Nos.1 and 6 did not comepossession of plaint schedule properties; since defendant Nos.1 and 6 did not come forward for amicable partition of plaint schedule properties into four equal sharesforward for amicable partition of plaint schedule properties into four equal shares and allot one such share to the plaintiff in the plaint schedule properties, plaintiffand allot one such share to the plaintiff in the plaint schedule properties, plaintiff has filed the present suit for partition. The submission of the plaintiff further showshas filed the present suit for partition. The submission of the plaintiff further shows that, through the plaintiff side witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2 and through marking thethat, through the plaintiff side witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2 and through marking the certified copy of registered partition deed Ex.A.1 dated 17.11.2010, the plaintiff hascertified copy of registered partition deed Ex.A.1 dated 17.11.2010, the plaintiff has proved her case and praying to decree the suit. It is relevant to note here thatproved her case and praying to decree the suit. It is relevant to note here that defendant Nos.2 to 5 has supported the case of the plaintiff. Per Contra, defendant Nos.2 to 5 has supported the case of the plaintiff. Per Contra, thethe contention of the defendant Nos.1 and 6 inter alia that, the marriage of the plaintiffcontention of the defendant Nos.1 and 6 inter alia that, the marriage of the plaintiff took place about 55 years back, so that she has got no right/share in the ancestraltook place about 55 years back, so that she has got no right/share in the ancestral properties; moreover, her share of properties were given at the time of her marriageproperties; moreover, her share of properties were given at the time of her marriage and after the marriage also. The contention of the defendant Nos.1 and 6 furtherand after the marriage also. The contention of the defendant Nos.1 and 6 further shows that, there is no undivided joint family properties for partition between theshows that, there is no undivided joint family properties for partition between the plaintiff and the defendants; accordingly praying to dismiss the suit.plaintiff and the defendants; accordingly praying to dismiss the suit.
12.12.Admittedly, the plaintiff being the daughter of late AnumalasettyAdmittedly, the plaintiff being the daughter of late Anumalasetty
Raghavulu claiming share over her father’s ancestral/coparcenary properties on parRaghavulu claiming share over her father’s ancestral/coparcenary properties on par with her 3 brothers. As per Hindu Succession (Andhra Pradesh Amendment) Act,with her 3 brothers. As per Hindu Succession (Andhra Pradesh Amendment) Act, 1986, the daughter is entitled for share in the joint family property/coparcenary1986, the daughter is entitled for share in the joint family property/coparcenary property, only if her marriage was held on or after 05.09.1985. In other wards, ifproperty, only if her marriage was held on or after 05.09.1985. In other wards, if the marriage of the daughter was held prior to 05.09.1985, the daughter is notthe marriage of the daughter was held prior to 05.09.1985, the daughter is not entitled for share in the joint family property/coparcenary property. Here, in theentitled for share in the joint family property/coparcenary property. Here, in the instant case, neither the date nor the year of the marriage of the plaintiff is averredinstant case, neither the date nor the year of the marriage of the plaintiff is averred in the plaint or in the evidence of plaintiff side witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2, whichin the plaint or in the evidence of plaintiff side witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2, which shows that the plaintiff has wantonly suppressed her date and year of the marriageshows that the plaintiff has wantonly suppressed her date and year of the marriage for the purpose of the suit. In the plaint, the plaintiff has shown her age as 65 yearsfor the purpose of the suit. In the plaint, the plaintiff has shown her age as 65 years at the time of filing of the suit in the year 2011. Considering the above discussedat the time of filing of the suit in the year 2011. Considering the above discussed circumstances coupled with age of the plaintiff mentioned in the plaint, this courtcircumstances coupled with age of the plaintiff mentioned in the plaint, this court find force in the contention of defendant Nos.1 and 6 that the marriage of thefind force in the contention of defendant Nos.1 and 6 that the marriage of the 7 plaintiff was held long prior to Hindu Succession (Andhra Pradesh Amendment)plaintiff was held long prior to Hindu Succession (Andhra Pradesh Amendment)
Act, 1986 which came into effect from 05.09.1985. In the said circumstances, thisAct, 1986 which came into effect from 05.09.1985. In the said circumstances, this court is of the opinion that plaintiff being the daughter is not entitled for share incourt is of the opinion that plaintiff being the daughter is not entitled for share in the joint family properties/coparcenary properties i.e., in the plaint schedulethe joint family properties/coparcenary properties i.e., in the plaint schedule properties by virtue of Hindu Succession (Andhra Pradesh Amendment) Act, 1986.properties by virtue of Hindu Succession (Andhra Pradesh Amendment) Act, 1986.
13.13.In Prakash and others V/s Poolavathi and others (rendered on 16thIn Prakash and others V/s Poolavathi and others (rendered on 16th
October, 2015) the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that father of the daughterOctober, 2015) the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that father of the daughter should be alive as on the date of Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 should be alive as on the date of Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 came into effect so as to get the daughter equal share in ancestral property on came into effect so as to get the daughter equal share in ancestral property on par with son. Here, in the instant case the date and year of death of plaintiff’spar with son. Here, in the instant case the date and year of death of plaintiff’s father also neither averred in the plaint nor stated in the evidence of plaintiff sidefather also neither averred in the plaint nor stated in the evidence of plaintiff side witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2. It shows that the plaintiff has deliberately suppressedwitnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2. It shows that the plaintiff has deliberately suppressed the date and year of death of her father also for the purpose of filing the suit.the date and year of death of her father also for the purpose of filing the suit.
Considering the same, the plaintiff is not entitled for share in her joint familyConsidering the same, the plaintiff is not entitled for share in her joint family properties/coparcenary properties i.e., the plaint schedule properties by virtue ofproperties/coparcenary properties i.e., the plaint schedule properties by virtue of
Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 also.Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 also.
14.14.It is significant to note here that except the oral evidence of plaintiffIt is significant to note here that except the oral evidence of plaintiff side witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2, no piece of documentary evidence was available inside witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2, no piece of documentary evidence was available in this case to show that plaint schedule properties are the joint familythis case to show that plaint schedule properties are the joint family properties/coparcenary properties of the family of the plaintiff and the defendants.properties/coparcenary properties of the family of the plaintiff and the defendants.
One document namely certified copy of registered partition deed Ex.A.1 datedOne document namely certified copy of registered partition deed Ex.A.1 dated 17.11.2010 marked by the plaintiff side with respect to item No.4 of plaint schedule17.11.2010 marked by the plaintiff side with respect to item No.4 of plaint schedule property herein, also not clearly showing that the said property is theproperty herein, also not clearly showing that the said property is the ancestral/coparcenary property of the family of the plaintiff and the defendants. Inancestral/coparcenary property of the family of the plaintiff and the defendants. In view of the said circumstances, the plaintiff has failed to prove that item Nos.1 to 5view of the said circumstances, the plaintiff has failed to prove that item Nos.1 to 5 of plaint schedule properties are their ancestral/coparcenary properties and that sheof plaint schedule properties are their ancestral/coparcenary properties and that she is entitled for share over the said properties.is entitled for share over the said properties.
15.15.In view of the above discussed circumstances, even though defendantsIn view of the above discussed circumstances, even though defendants side did not adduce any oral or documentary evidence and did not enter into theside did not adduce any oral or documentary evidence and did not enter into the 8 witness box to give evidence in support of their contention, no adverse inferencewitness box to give evidence in support of their contention, no adverse inference can be drawn against the defendants and in favour of the plaintiff since the plaintiffcan be drawn against the defendants and in favour of the plaintiff since the plaintiff has failed to discharge her initial burden of proving that she is entitled for share inhas failed to discharge her initial burden of proving that she is entitled for share in the plaint schedule properties. Hence, this court is of the opinion that the plaintiffthe plaint schedule properties. Hence, this court is of the opinion that the plaintiff is not entitled for partition of plaint schedule properties as prayed for. Accordingly,is not entitled for partition of plaint schedule properties as prayed for. Accordingly, issue No.2 is decided against the plaintiff.issue No.2 is decided against the plaintiff.
16.16.Issue No.3::Issue No.3
In the result, the suit is dismissed. Considering the facts andIn the result, the suit is dismissed. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, each party do bear their own costs.circumstances of the case, each party do bear their own costs.
Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed by him, corrected andDictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed by him, corrected and
pronounced by me in Open Court, this the 16pronounced by me in Open Court, this the 16 th th day of June, 2020. day of June, 2020.
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
CHIRALA CHIRALA
// Appendix of Evidence // // Appendix of Evidence //
: Witnesses examined : : Witnesses examined :
For Plaintiffs For Defendants
P.W.1: N. Srinivasa Rao.None P.W.2: P. Venkateswarlu.
DOCUMENTS MARKED
For plaintiffs
Ex.A1/ : Certified copy of registered partition deed dated 17.11.2010. For defendants
NIL
S.C.J., Chirala. S.C.J., Chirala.
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT CHIRALA, IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT CHIRALA,
Present : Sri S. Krishnan Kutty,Present : Sri S. Krishnan Kutty,
Senior Civil Judge, Chirala.Senior Civil Judge, Chirala.
Tuesday, the 16thTuesday, the 16th day of June, 2020 day of June, 2020
Original Suit No.36/2011 Original Suit No.36/2011
1. Naralasetty Lakshmikanthamma (DIED) by L.Rs.1.Naralasetty Lakshmikanthamma (DIED) by L.Rs.
2. Naralasetty Nageswara Rao S/o.Venkata Swamy,2.Naralasetty Nageswara Rao S/o.Venkata Swamy, Hindu, age 75 years, Agriculture,Hindu, age 75 years, Agriculture, R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.
3. Naralasetty Srinivasa Rao S/o.Nageswara Rao,3.Naralasetty Srinivasa Rao S/o.Nageswara Rao, Hindu, age 52 years, Agriculture,Hindu, age 52 years, Agriculture, R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.
4. Naralasetty Ramabrahmam S/o.Nageswara Rao,4.Naralasetty Ramabrahmam S/o.Nageswara Rao, Hindu, age 51 years, Employee,Hindu, age 51 years, Employee, R/o.D.No.219/31G, 2ndR/o.D.No.219/31G, 2nd line, Pasuputhota, line, Pasuputhota, Maduranagar, Vijayawada.Maduranagar, Vijayawada.
5. Naralasetty Satyanarayana S/o.Nageswara Rao,5.Naralasetty Satyanarayana S/o.Nageswara Rao, Hindu, age 48 years, Employee,Hindu, age 48 years, Employee, R/o.D.No.2111174, Reserve Line, Police Quarters,R/o.D.No.2111174, Reserve Line, Police Quarters, Kakinada, East Godawari District.Kakinada, East Godawari District.
6. Rajendraprasad Sumati W/o.Rajendra Prasad,6.Rajendraprasad Sumati W/o.Rajendra Prasad, age 45 years, Hindu, Housewife,age 45 years, Hindu, Housewife, R/o.D.No.145/2, 4thR/o.D.No.145/2, 4th street, ICF West Colony, street, ICF West Colony, Chennai.Chennai.
7. Naralasetty Seetaramadevi D/o.Nageswara Rao,7.Naralasetty Seetaramadevi D/o.Nageswara Rao, age 42 years, Hindu, Housewife,age 42 years, Hindu, Housewife, R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.
8. Sikharam Hymavathi W/o.Srinivasarao,8.Sikharam Hymavathi W/o.Srinivasarao, Hindu, age 39 years, Housewife,Hindu, age 39 years, Housewife, R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal. Plaintiff Nos.2 to 8 are added as L.Rs of 1stst plaintiffPlaintiff Nos.2 to 8 are added as L.Rs of 1 plaintiff as per orders in I.A.No.822/2013 dated 26.06.2014.as per orders in I.A.No.822/2013 dated 26.06.2014.
.....Plaintiffs .....Plaintiffs
V/sV/s
1. Anumalasetty Venkateswarlu (DIED) by L.Rs.1.Anumalasetty Venkateswarlu (DIED) by L.Rs.
2. Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi W/o.late Subbarao,2.Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi W/o.late Subbarao, Hindu, Housewife, aged about 60 years,Hindu, Housewife, aged about 60 years, R/o.Anumallipet village, Vetapalem Mandal.R/o.Anumallipet village, Vetapalem Mandal.
3. Anumalasetty Ramesh alias Raghavulu,3.Anumalasetty Ramesh alias Raghavulu, S/o.late Subbarao, Employee, aged about 35 years,S/o.late Subbarao, Employee, aged about 35 years, R/o.C/o.Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi, Anumallipet R/o.C/o.Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi, Anumallipet village, Vetapalem Mandal.village, Vetapalem Mandal.
4. Naralasetty Ganga Bhavani W/o.Srinivasarao,4.Naralasetty Ganga Bhavani W/o.Srinivasarao, age 45 years, Hindu, Housewife R/o.Sopiralaage 45 years, Hindu, Housewife R/o.Sopirala Village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.Village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.
5. Nunna Umamaheswari W/o.Purnachandra Rao,5.Nunna Umamaheswari W/o.Purnachandra Rao, aged about 40 years, Hindu, Housewife,aged about 40 years, Hindu, Housewife, R/o.C/o.Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi, Anumallipet R/o.C/o.Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi, Anumallipet village, Vetapalem Mandal.village, Vetapalem Mandal.
6. Anumalasetty Subbarayudu (DIED) by L.Rs.6.Anumalasetty Subbarayudu (DIED) by L.Rs.
7. Anumalasetty Sridevi W/o.late Venkateswarlu,7.Anumalasetty Sridevi W/o.late Venkateswarlu, aged about 67 years, Hindu, Housewife,aged about 67 years, Hindu, Housewife, R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.
8. Anumalasetty Pandurangarao S/o.late Venkateswarlu,8.Anumalasetty Pandurangarao S/o.late Venkateswarlu, aged about 56 years, Hindu, Housewife,aged about 56 years, Hindu, Housewife, R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.
9. Banala alias Anumalasetty Annapurna,9.Banala alias Anumalasetty Annapurna, D/o.late Venkateswarlu, aged about 50 years,D/o.late Venkateswarlu, aged about 50 years, Hindu, Housewife, R/o.Sopirala village, Hindu, Housewife, R/o.Sopirala village, Chinnaganjam Mandal.Chinnaganjam Mandal. Defendant Nos.7 to 9 are added as L.Rs of the Defendant Nos.7 to 9 are added as L.Rs of the 11stst defendant as per orders in I.A.No.1865/12 defendant as per orders in I.A.No.1865/12
dated 29.12.2014.dated 29.12.2014.
10. Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi,10.Anumalasetty Vijayalakshmi, W/o.late Subbarayudu, aged about 60 years, W/o.late Subbarayudu, aged about 60 years, Hindu, Housewife.Hindu, Housewife.
11. Anumalasetty Venkateswara Rao,11.Anumalasetty Venkateswara Rao, S/o.late Subbarayudu, aged about 35 years, Hindu.S/o.late Subbarayudu, aged about 35 years, Hindu.
12. Anumalasetty Srinivasarao S/o.late Subbarayudu,12.Anumalasetty Srinivasarao S/o.late Subbarayudu, aged about 33 years, Hindu.aged about 33 years, Hindu.
13. Anumalasetty Ramasubbarao S/o.late Subbarayudu,13.Anumalasetty Ramasubbarao S/o.late Subbarayudu, aged about 30 years, Hindu.aged about 30 years, Hindu. Defendant Nos.10 to 13 are R/o.D.No.15364/1/3, Defendant Nos.10 to 13 are R/o.D.No.15364/1/3, Plot No.69/B, near Om Kirana Shop, Suryanagar Colony, Plot No.69/B, near Om Kirana Shop, Suryanagar Colony, Indian Gas Godown Area, Kallu Compound, Indian Gas Godown Area, Kallu Compound, Old Alwal, Hyderabad.Old Alwal, Hyderabad.
14. Pallapolu Padma W/o.Venkata Rao, age 38 years,14.Pallapolu Padma W/o.Venkata Rao, age 38 years, Hindu, Housewife R/o.D.No.156/D, RailwayHindu, Housewife R/o.D.No.156/D, Railway Quarters, Satyanarayanapuram Railway Colony,Quarters, Satyanarayanapuram Railway Colony, Vijayawada.Vijayawada. Defendant Nos.10 to 14 are added as L.Rs of theDefendant Nos.10 to 14 are added as L.Rs of the defendant No.6 as per orders in I.A.No.922/2015defendant No.6 as per orders in I.A.No.922/2015
dated 29.01.2018.dated 29.01.2018.
…..Defendants …..Defendants
The suit is filed for partition of plaint schedule properties into four equalThe suit is filed for partition of plaint schedule properties into four equal shares and allot one such share to the plaintiff, and for costs.shares and allot one such share to the plaintiff, and for costs.
Plaint presented on 14.03.2011 and filed on 25.03.2011Plaint presented on 14.03.2011 and filed on 25.03.2011
Cause of action: Cause of action for the suit arose when the plaint scheduleCause of action: Cause of action for the suit arose when the plaint schedule properties are the ancestral properties of the plaintiff, defendant Nos.1 and 6 andproperties are the ancestral properties of the plaintiff, defendant Nos.1 and 6 and husband and father of defendant Nos.2 and 3 to 5 and when the plaintiff demandedhusband and father of defendant Nos.2 and 3 to 5 and when the plaintiff demanded the defendants for amicable partition and when the defendants did not comethe defendants for amicable partition and when the defendants did not come forward for partition and that the suit schedule properties are situated within theforward for partition and that the suit schedule properties are situated within the jurisdiction of this court.jurisdiction of this court.
Valuation: For the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction; value of item No.1 isValuation: For the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction; value of item No.1 is Rs.3,77,400; value of item No.2 is Rs.48,400; value of item No.3 is Rs.96,800; valueRs.3,77,400; value of item No.2 is Rs.48,400; value of item No.3 is Rs.96,800; value of item No.4 is Rs.1,18,000 and value of item No.5 is Rs.70,800. Total value ofof item No.4 is Rs.1,18,000 and value of item No.5 is Rs.70,800. Total value of item Nos.1 to 5 is Rs.7,11,400/; 1/4th of plaintiff’s share is Rs.1,77,850/; 3/4th ofitem Nos.1 to 5 is Rs.7,11,400/; 1/4th of plaintiff’s share is Rs.1,77,850/; 3/4th of market value is Rs.1,33,387/. Since the plaint schedule properties are in joint andmarket value is Rs.1,33,387/. Since the plaint schedule properties are in joint and constructive possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff and defendants a fixed courtconstructive possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff and defendants a fixed court fee of Rs.200/ is paid U/s.34(2) of APCF & SV Act.fee of Rs.200/ is paid U/s.34(2) of APCF & SV Act.
This suit is coming on 04.03.2020 before me for final hearing in the presenceThis suit is coming on 04.03.2020 before me for final hearing in the presence of Sri N.Rajuof Sri N.Raju, Advocate for the Plaintiffs and of , Advocate for the Plaintiffs and of Sri K.S.S.Prasad, Sri K.S.S.Prasad, Advocate for Advocate for defendant Nos.2 to 5 and of Sri T.Srikanth, defendant Nos.2 to 5 and of Sri T.Srikanth, Advocate for defendant No.8 andAdvocate for defendant No.8 and defendant Nos.7, 9, 10 to 14 having remained exparte and defendant Nos.1 and 6defendant Nos.7, 9, 10 to 14 having remained exparte and defendant Nos.1 and 6 died; and on careful perusal of material available on record and on hearing on bothdied; and on careful perusal of material available on record and on hearing on both the side and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court doth orderthe side and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court doth order and decree:and decree:
i. That the suit be and the same is dismissed; and ii. That each party do bear their own costs.
The plaintiffs do bear their own costs of Rs.202/ towards
institutional costs.
Given under my hand and seal of this court, this the 16Given under my hand and seal of this court, this the 16 th th day of June, 2020. day of June, 2020.
Senior Civil Judge, Senior Civil Judge,
Chirala. Chirala.
TABLE OF COSTS TABLE OF COSTS
For PlaintiffFor Defendants Stamp on Vakalath200 Stamp on Plaint 20000CM & FC not filed ProcessCM & FC not filed Advocate fee Type charges
Total20200
దవ షడడలదవ షడడల
1 1వ అయటట: : పపకశట జలల , , పపకశట జలలచననగటజట మటడలట, , అమమనబబల సబ రజససర సరర నట.563 .563 లనలన వ అయటటచననగటజట మటడలటఅమమనబబల సబ రజససర సరర నట య.0.13 య.0.13 శటటల ఖళ ససలమనక హదద ల. .శటటల ఖళ ససలమనక హదద ల తతరర : :అనమలశటట పదద వటకటశరరల , , అనమలశటట పదద వటకటశరరలతమమలపటట పదద రమరవ. . తతరరతమమలపటట పదద రమరవ దకణట: :దకణటపలకట రతనకమర, , పలకట రతనకమరభరర నరసహరవ. .భరర నరసహరవ పడమర: :పడమరకరణట శషయడ S/o. కరణట శషయడS/o. కపషషమతరరకపషషమతరర. .
ఉతరరట : :ఉతరరటమటడలట పపకకననన రడడ . .మటడలట పపకకననన రడడ 2 2వఅయటట: : పపకశటజలల , జలల, చననగటజటమటడలట, , అమమనబబలసబరజససరసరర వఅయటటపపకశటచననగటజటమటడలటఅమమనబబలసబరజససరసరర నట.472/5నట.472/5లన షమర య.0.04 లన షమర య.0.04 శటటల ఖళ ససలమనక హదద ల. .శటటల ఖళ ససలమనక హదద ల తతరర : :తతరరగవరనమటట రడడగవరనమటట రడడ దకణట: :తమమలపటట సబబమమ ఇలల , , తమమలపటట సబబమమ ఇలలతమమలపటట పటట భరమల ఖళసరలట. . తమమలపటట పటట భరమల ఖళసరలట దకణట పడమర: :శఖరట వటకటశరరల S/o. శఖరట వటకటశరరలS/o. నరసటహనరసటహ. . పడమర ఉతరరట : :ఉతరరటఅనమలశటట శషయడగర సరలట. .అనమలశటట శషయడగర సరలట 3 3వఅయటట: : పపకశటజలల , జలల, చననగటజటమటడలట, , అమమనబబలసబరజససరసరర వఅయటటపపకశటచననగటజటమటడలటఅమమనబబలసబరజససరసరర నట.472/8నట.472/8లన య.0.02 లన య.0.02 శటటల ఖళ ససలమనక హదద ల. .శటటల ఖళ ససలమనక హదద ల తతరర : :శఖరట వటకటశరరల S/o. శఖరట వటకటశరరలS/o. నరసటహనరసటహ. . తతరర దకణట: :దకణటపలలపల సబబరయడ, , శటకరయడపలలపల సబబరయడశటకరయడ. .
పడమర: :పడమరతమమలపటట అటకమమ. .తమమలపటట అటకమమ ఉతరరట : :ఉతరరటతమమలపటట అటకమమ. .తమమలపటట అటకమమ 4 4వ అయటట: : పపకశట జలల , పపకశట జలల, చననగటజట మటడలట, , అమమనబబల సబ రజససర ( (అబబయడగరఅబబయడగర వ అయటటచననగటజట మటడలటఅమమనబబల సబ రజససర తటవదద, తటవదద, దద.17112010 .17112010 లన " "డడ" లన" షడడలషడడల) ) సరర నట.483/8సరర నట.483/8లన షమర య.0.98¼లన షమర య.0.98¼ శటటల మరక భతమక హదద ల. .శటటల మరక భతమక హదద ల తతరర : :తతరరఅనమలశటట సబబరవమమ. .అనమలశటట సబబరవమమ దకణట: :దకణటసమశనట వళళ రడడ . .సమశనట వళళ రడడ పడమర: :పడమరపలకట రధలత. .పలకట రధలత ఉతరరట : :ఉతరరటజయటట సన. .జయటట సన 5 5వఅయటట: : పపకశటజలల , జలల, చననగటజటమటడలట, , అమమనబబలసబరజససరసరర వఅయటటపపకశటచననగటజటమటడలటఅమమనబబలసబరజససరసరర నట.479/3నట.479/3లన షమర య.0.60 లన షమర య.0.60 శటటల మగణ భతమక హదద ల. .శటటల మగణ భతమక హదద ల తతరర : :తతరరనటపరదల కలర. .నటపరదల కలర దకణట: :చననకలర, , పలకట వటకటశరరల . .పలకట వటకటశరరల దకణటచననకలర పడమర: :పడమరతమమలపటట అటకమమ. .తమమలపటట అటకమమ ఉతరరట : :ఉతరరటచలలర వటకటశట S/o. చలలర వటకటశటS/o. సబబరవసబబరవ. .
సనయర సవల జడడ, , సనయర సవల జడడ
చరలచరల. .