INTRODUCTION

These four appeals are interconnected. The property dispute raised in appeals is with reference to various items of immovable property in plaint 'A' and 'B' schedule of O.S.No.13 of 19741 (hereafter called, first suit), against which, first defendant filed A.S.No.2219 of 1982 and defendant Nos.3 and 4 filed A.S.No.212 of 1981. Tr.A.S.No.1277 of 1991 is filed by third defendant, who lost her separate suit for declaration and possession, being O.S.No.21 of 1975 (hereafter called, second suit). Similarly, Tr.A.S.No.1274 of 1991 is filed by fourth defendant when his suit, being O.S.No.22 of 1975 (hereafter called, third suit) for declaration of title was dismissed by the lower Court, by impugned common judgment. The trial Court decreed O.S.No.13 of 1974 for partition overruling objections of defendant Nos.1, 3 and 4 that some of the items of plaint A and B schedule properties are not joint family properties and that they ceased to be joint family properties by reason of various alienations made by manager of the family for family necessities. Who is who

2. The entire controversy and litigation is in relation to property of Kanumarlapudi family of Reddipalem Village of Kandukuru Mandal in Prakasam District. For the purpose of this case one can look at, not beyond Kanumarlapudi Subbaiah and his family in 1950 and thereafter. Subbaiah is vysya gentleman. Basically, he was a Kirana merchant selling sundry items. He and his wife, Mahalakshmamma @ Venkata Lakshmamma (plaintiff No.3), had five sons and four daughters. Venkata Narasimham, Venkateswarlu (defendant No.1), Rathaiah (plaintiff No.1), Subba Rao (plaintiff No.2) and Tirupathaiah (defendant No.2) are sons. Venkata Narasimham died on 05.06.1958, but his wife, Kanthamma, is defendant No.10 in first suit. It appears she remarried after death of her husband.

3. Apart from members of Subbaiah's core family as above, there are other closely related players, who significantly contributed to the litigation. Modadugu Venkata Subbamma is the sister of Maha Lakshmamma. All along, she was staying in Reddipalem with Subbaiah's family. Bysani Venkateswarlu (fifth defendant) is younger brother of Maha Lakshmamma and Venkata Subbamma. The son of fifth defendant is Bysani Krishna Rao (defendant No.4). In addition to these closely related persons, Vavilala Venkata Lakshmamma (defendant No.6), Thikkavarapu Krishna Reddy (seventh defendant) and Dasari Peddanna (ninth defendant) also set up claims in an item or two of plaint schedule properties. One Kanakamma, younger sister of Subbaiah, at one stage played significant role in the family affairs. Who instituted what

4. First suit is filed by Rathaiah, Subba Rao and Maha Lakshmamma - sons and wife of Subbaiah, for partition of plaint 'A' 'B' and 'C' schedule properties against other two sons as well as Venkata Subbamma, Krishna Rao, Bysani Venkateswarlu and others. Second suit is filed by Venkata Subbamma for declaration and possession contending that certain items of property sold to her by the first defendant are her exclusive properties. Third suit was filed by Krishna Rao, the cousin of plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 and defendant Nos.1 and 2, claiming certain items as having purchased from first defendant. Vavilala Venkata Lakshamma, a distant relative of Subbaiah, also filed O.S.No.23 of 1974 for recovery of money based on a promissory note allegedly executed by first defendant and obtained attachment before judgment in respect of the properties claimed by defendant Nos.3 and 4. They filed claim petitions, which were dismissed. Third defendant therefore filed Tr.A.S. No.1278 of 1991 and fourth defendant filed Tr.A.S. No.1276 of 1991. However, having regard to the subsequent event that the entire decree in O.S.No.23 of 1974 was satisfied and a memo having been filed to that effect, a separate order is passed in those matters dismissing the same.

5. For the purpose of this judgment, the pleadings in first suit alone are requi