JUDGMENT :

B. PRAKASH RAO, J.:— Heard Sri V.L.N.G.K. Murthy, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri A. Venkata Ramana, the learned Counsel who has been appointed to assist the Court as Amicus Curiae, since none appears on behalf of the respondents, though served.

2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellant is the unsuccessful plaintiff who, by way of this appeal, seeks to assail the judgment and decree dated 31-12-2001 in O.S. No. 15 of 2000 on the file of the District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam. In the suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff, she sought a declaration that she alone is entitled to plaint ‘A’ to ‘D’ schedule movable and immovable properties as per the last Will dated 12-3-2000 executed by the testator and for possession of properties from the hands of defendants and for future profits over the schedule properties and costs or alternatively for partition of the schedule properties into two shares and deliver one share to the plaintiff. The case of the plaintiff principally rests on the basis that the second defendant is her brother. The first defendant is the wife of the deceased M. Narasimha Rao. The plaintiff claims to have been ado