Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
B.S.BHANUMATHI
Mitaigiri Sulthan Hussain @ Mitaigiri Mohammed Sultan, son of M.Rasool Naik – Appellant
Versus
Dudekula Hussain Sab, son of Dudekula Jalal Saheb @ Jamalu Saheb – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition filed under article 227 due to suit dismissal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. factual background of property ownership and sale history. (Para 4) |
| 3. respondents contest ownership related to the plaint schedule property. (Para 5) |
| 4. trial court's rationale for dismissing the petition. (Para 6) |
| 5. necessary party status for adjudication is recognized. (Para 10) |
| 6. revision petition is allowed, trial order set aside. (Para 11) |
ORDER :
B.S.BHANUMATHI, J.
This revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 21.04.2025 dismissing I.A.No.227 of 2023 in O.S.No.61 of 2022 on the file of the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kurnool, filed by the third party/ revision petitioner under Order I, Rule 10 of C.P.C. and Rule 28 of CIVIL RULES OF PRACTICE to implead him as defendant No.5 in the suit.
2. The respondents No.1 to 3 filed the suit against the respondents No.4 to 7 seeking partition of Ac.4.56 cents of land in Sy.No.1274/B of Nannuru Village, Orvakal Mandal, Orvakal Sub- division, Kurnool Division, Kurnool District bounded by the following boundaries:
East : Agricultural land in Sy.No.1287.
West : Agricultural land in Sy.No
A party with an interest in the property is a necessary party in a partition suit to ensure just adjudication and prevent collusive decrees.
The court affirmed that the deceased's legal heirs retain ownership rights to family property, provided there is adequate evidence of succession and possession.
The right and title to property should be determined based on title deeds and possession, and the theory of 'error' deduced from Rule 56 of the Kerala Survey and Boundary Rules, 1964 has no applicati....
Plaint rejection not warranted for survey number disputes; merits determined at trial.
An application to amend the plaint is maintainable even after passing of the preliminary decree, since the suit is not terminated and proceedings are continuous.
Amendments to pleadings post-trial commencement are permissible if due diligence is shown, and inadvertent mistakes in boundaries can be corrected.
A plaintiff asserting ownership based on historical rights and alleged partition must be permitted to pursue relief through trial when faced with disputed claims and questions of fact.
To establish ownership, a plaintiff must prove lawful possession and boundaries through credible evidence, while appellate courts will defer to trial court findings unless they are unsupported by mat....
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
