ORDER :

1. 1st Defendant in the suit filed the above revision against the order dated 12.07.2022 in I.A. No. 267 of 2021 in O.S. No. 22 of 2014 on the file of XI Additional District Judge, Tenali.

2. 1st Respondent, being the plaintiff filed suit O.S. No. 22 of 2014 against the revision petitioner and 2nd respondent herein seeking partition of plaint schedule properties.

3. As per the averments in the plaint, plaintiff and defendants are the children of Adusumalli Chalapathi Rao and Annapurnamma; that plaint A schedule property is the ancestral property of Chalapathi Rao; that plaint B schedule property was purchased by Chalapathi Rao under a registered sale deed dated 13.10.1983 and plaint C schedule property belonged to A. Annapurnamma and she purchased the same under a registered sale deed dated 31.12.1971; that brother of Chalapati Rao, by name Ramamohana Rao died intestate; that even after death of Ramamohana Rao, his heirs and Chalapathi Rao are jointly enjoying the joint family properties; that Chalapathi Rao and children of Ramamohana Rao partitioned the joint family properties under a registered partition deed dated 10.12.2018; that in the said partition, ‘A’ schedule property i.e. plaint ‘A’ schedule properties fell to the share of Chalapathi Rao and his children i.e. plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2; that Chalapathi Rao died intestateon 22.03.2009 and plaintiff, defendants 1 and 2 succeeded to item Nos. 1 to 4 of plaint A and B schedule properties; that mother of plaintiff, defendants 1 and 2 purchased house site and constructed RCC building in the C schedule property; that Annapurnamma died on 27.05.2013 and that the plaintiff is entitled to 1/3rd share in plaint A, B and C schedule properties and filed the suit seeking partition.

4. 1st Defendant filed written statement and contended interalia that plaintiff was separated from his father Chalapathi Rao about 30 years back and has been living separately; that plaintiff orally took Ac. 1.00 cents of wet land towards his share and orally relinquished his share from the joint family of his father Chalapathi Rao; that plaintiff sold Ac. 1.00 cents of land and received entire consideration, however his father executed sale deed; that during the marriage of 2nd defendant, Annapurnamma gifted plaint B schedule property and an extent of 311 square yards of site in T.S. No. 31 and 32 bearing Plot No. 291 of Zillelagudem of Rangareddy District towards pasupukunkuma; that 311 square yards of site was purchased by Annapurnamma under a registered sale deed dated 20.08.1985; that 2nd defendant accepted the gift and took possession of B schedule property along with 311 square yards; that later father died without executing any document in respect of ‘B’ schedule property in favour of 2nd defendant; that on 11.02.2011, mother of plaintiff and 1st defendant Annapurnamma bequeathed plaint B schedule property along with 311 square yards to 2nd defendant under a registered Will bearing No. 24/BK/2011; that during her lifetime, Annapurnamma bequeathed plaint C schedule property to 1st defendant in a sound and disposing state of mind under an unregistered Will dated 02.08.2012, which was attested and notarized by Mekala Ravi, Advocate; thus, 1st defendant who is legatee, became the absolute owner of plaint C schedule property after the death of Annapurnamma; that plaintiff is not the co-sharer in respect of plaint A, B and C schedule properties and hence, not entitled to 1/3rd share and prayed to dismiss the suit.

5. 2nd Defendant filed separate written statement and pleaded oral gift in respect of plaint B schedule property and 311 square yards of site and later execution of registered Will dated 14.02.2011 and thus, prayed to dismiss the suit.

6. During the trial, 1st defendant filed I.A. No. 267 of 2021 under Order XVI Rule 7 of CPC to issue summons to the District Registrar, Rangareddy (East), L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad to cause production of Index Register in respect of sale transaction dated