( 1 ) AS No. 624 of 1993 is filed as against the judgment and decree made in OS No. 267 of 1982, dated 11. 8. 1992 on the file of principal Subordinate Judge, Narsaraopet. Transfer Appeal Suit No. 1260 of 2002 is filed as against the decree and judgment, dated 11. 8. 1992 made in OS No. 229 of 1984 on the file of Principal Subordinate judge, Narsaraopet. Both these suits were disposed of by a common Judgment.

( 2 ) OS No. 267 of 1982 was filed for the relief of partition of the plaint schedule properties into 9 equal shares and allot one such share to each of the plantiffs by passing a preliminary decree and to appoint a receiver to take possession of the properties and manage the properties pending disposal of the suit, and in the alternative for mesne profits and for other appropriate reliefs. The said suit was filed by Parchuri sambasiva Rao and Parchuri Gopala Rao, the then minors represented by the next friend-guardian and mother Krishna Kumari. In the said suit, the 4th defendant was added as supplemental defendant as per orders in IA No. 1529 of 1985, dated 6. 11. 1985. The said Parchuri Krishna kumari, mother of the plaintiffs in OS no. 267 of 1982, instituted yet another suit os No. 229 of 1984 as an indigent person praying for the relief of maintenance at the rate of Rs. 300/- per month and for past maintenance at the rate of the same for three years and to grant Rs. 10,000/- for separate residence and further praying for a charge over the plaint A schedule properties in relation to the relief of maintenance and for certain other appropriate reliefs. In the light of the respective pleadings of the parties, having settled the issues, on behalf of the plaintiffs PWs. 1 to 3 were examined. Likewise on behalf of the defendants, dws. 1 to 7 were examined, Exs. Bl to B6 and also Exs. Xl to X4 were marked. After recording findings, the learned Judge decreed the suit OS No. 267 of 1982 with costs and a preliminary decree was passed for partition of the plaint schedule properties into 9 equal shares allotting one such share to each of the plaintiffs and separate possession of the said properties as all the properties are liable for partition and further directed the enquiry into mesne profits on a separate application from the date of suit till delivery of possession. Likewise OS No. 229 of 1984 was decreed with costs granting a sum of rs. 300/- per month towards monthly maintenance from the date of suit and a sum of Rs. 150/- per month towards past maintenance for three years preceding the filing of the suit and a sum of Rs. 7,500/-towards separate residence for the plaintiff therein and defendants 1 to 3 were directed to pay the Court fee on the plaint due to the Government.

( 3 ) AS already referred to supra, aggrieved by the decree and judgment made in OS No. 267 of 1982, appeal AS No. 624 of 1993 was preferred to this Court and on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction, the appeal as against the decree and judgment in OS No. 229 of 1984 was preferred before the District Judge, Guntur, which was transferred to this Court by virtue of an order made in Transfer CMP No. 189 of 2001, to be heard and disposed of along with AS No. 624 of 1993. Thus, both these appeals are being heard by this Court.

( 4 ) THE 3rd defendant in the suit OS no. 267 of 1982, the father, died on 13. 5. 2002 and his daughters were brought on record as his legal representatives on 3. 11. 2003 and shown as appellants 5 to 7. The said appellants 5 to 7 filed ASMP No. 394 of 2007 praying this Court to receive additional written statement filed by the 6th appellant and the Memo of Adoption filed by appellants 5 to 7 adopting the said written statement. The Counsel representing the respondents opposed the said application. It is stated that the 4th defendant in OS No. 267 of 1982 also died and his legal representatives were brought on record. Contentions of Sri N. Srirama Murthy

( 5 ) SRI Srirama Murthy, learned counsel representing the appellants had take

Click Here to Read the rest of this document