Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
Allamraju Srinivasa Murthy – Appellant
Versus
Allamraju Syamala Murthy – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO, J.
1. This Appeal, under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure [for short ‘the C.P.C.’] is filed by the Appellant/defendant challenging the Decree and Judgment, dated 30.06.2008, in O.S. No. 279 of 1997 passed by the learned III Additional Senior Civil Judge (Fast Track Court), Visakhapatnam [for short ‘the trial Court’]. The Respondent herein is the plaintiff in the said Suit.
2. The appellant/defendant filed a Suit for partition of the suit schedule property into two equal shares and allotment of one such share to the plaintiff and for partition of the amount deposited in the Telegraph Employees Co-operative Thrift and Credit Society and to allot plaintiff’s half share with accrued interest and also the amount in the bank i.e. Rs.2,07,000/- and Rs.60,000/- respectively and future mesne profits of the yielding and for costs.
3. Both the parties in the Appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed before the trial Court.
4. The brief averments of the plaint, in O.S. No. 279 of 1997, are as under:
A will must be proved in accordance with statutory requirements; failure to do so invalidates claims based on it, allowing for equal partition of estate.
The court upheld the trial Court's decree for partition, ruling that the alleged Will was not proved, affirming the properties as joint family assets.
Proof of execution of Will – In cases where document sought to be proved is required by law to be attested, same cannot let be in evidence unless at least one of attesting witnesses has been called f....
Suit for partition - Partial partition not permissible - Admission of parties - Will duly established and cannot be held to be forge or fabricated one.
The burden of proof lies on the party alleging fraud in the execution of a will, and the plaintiffs successfully proved the validity of the will dated 17.03.1994.
The validity of a Will can be upheld despite procedural omissions if supported by sufficient evidence, and a partition suit may be dismissed if barred by limitation.
The court ruled that the alleged adoption was not proved and the will was surrounded by suspicious circumstances, entitling the plaintiffs to partition of the properties.
The father of the coparceners had no right to bequeath ancestral property via Will. Wills are invalid unless proven in accordance with statutory requirements.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
