BANDARU SYAMSUNDER
C. M. Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Channavajjhala Poora Cchandra Prasad – Respondent
ORDER:
This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner/2nd defendant under Article 227 of Constitution of India against the orders passed by the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, in I.A.No.280 of 2016 in O.S.No.134 of 2014 wherein and whereby the learned trial Judge dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner/defendants 2, 4, 5 and 6 under Section 65 of Evidence Act and refused to receive Photostat copy of the Will Deed as secondary evidence.
2. Before the trial Court R5/D6 filed petition on her behalf and also on behalf of D2, D4, D5 under Section 65 of Evidence Act stating that suit is filed by R1/plaintiff with false averment that plaint schedule property was the self-acquired property of late Sri C.L.N.Murthy, who died intestate and thereafter R1 and other defendants succeeded the suit schedule property with equal rights. She submits that plaint schedule property is never a joint property of R1 and themselves as after the death of late Sri C.L.N.Murthy, who executed a Will in his own handwriting during his lifetime sent the copies of said Will to all his children, i.e. to herself and all the respondents. It is the contention of R5/D6 that after the death
ASHOK DULICHAND v. MADHAVLAL DUBE AND ANOTHER
Dayamathi Bai (Smt.) vs. K.M. Shaffi - (2004) 7 SCC 107
R.V.E. Venkatachala Gounder vs. Arulmigu Viswesaraswami & V.P. Temple and Another
Ranvir Singh and another Vs. Union of India
SUDDAPALLI LAKSHMI SAROJA v. VISHNUBOTLA MURLI KRISHNA AND OTHERS
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.