SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(AP) 838

Y.V.NARAYANA
Mudda Rama Jaya Narasimha Phani Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Mudda Kameswara Somayajulu – Respondent


I. VENKATANARAYANA, J.

( 1 ) THE plaintiffs are the appellants in both these appeals. AS No. 2664 of 1984 has been filed by the appellants against the decree and judgment in OS No. 32 of 1974 on the file of the II Additional Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada. AS No. 2577 of 1984 has been filed by the plaintiffs/appellants against the decree and judgment in OS No. 87 of 1974 on the file of the II Additional Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada. Since both the appeals raise a common question whether the suit schedule properties are joint family properties and if so, whether the plaintiffs are entitled for their shares, these two appeals are disposed off by a common judgment. For the sake of convenience, the parties to these appeals would be referred in accordance with their ranking in the suits. AS No. 2664 of 1984 :

( 2 ) THE plaintiffs are the appellants. Suit OS No. 32 of 1974 has beep filed on the file of II Additional Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada for partition and separate possession of plaintiffs 2/9th joint share in plaint a schedule property. The averments in the plaint are briefly set-out here under: The plaintiffs are brothers and are undivided sons of the second defendant. First def















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top