IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Second Appeal – In a second appeal, High Court shall not reverse findings of both Courts below except under few situations.
(2) Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 enables daughters to exercise their coparcenary right and coparcenary is a birth right to a daughter.

JUDGMENT

This second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (“C.P.C.” for short) is filed aggrieved against the Judgment and decree, dated 17.03.2023 in A.S.No.27 of 2018, on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Bhimavaram (“First Appellate Court” for short), confirming the Judgment and decree, dated 20.04.2018 in O.S.No.4 of 2012, on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Bhimavaram (“Trial Court” for short).

2. The appellants herein are the defendants and the respondent herein is the plaintiff in O.S.No.4 of 2012, on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Bhimavaram.

3. The plaintiff initiated action in O.S.No.4 of 2012 with a prayer for partition of the plaint schedule property into four equal shares by metes and bounds and to allot one such share to the plaintiff and for costs of the suit.

4. The learned trial Judge decreed the suit preliminarily without costs. Felt aggrieved of the same, the unsuccessful defendants in the above said suit filed A.S.No.27 of 2018, on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Bhimavaram. The learned First Appellate Judge dismissed the appeal by confirming the decree and judgment passed by the learned trial Judge. Aggrieved thereby, the defendants in the said suit approached this Court by way of second appeal.

5. For the sake of convenience, both parties in the appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in the original suit.

6. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, as set out in the plaint averments in O.S.No.4 of 2012, is as follows:

The 1st defendant is father of plaintiff and defendant Nos.2 and 3. The plaintiff and 3rd defendant are daughters whereas 2nd defendant is son of 1st defendant. 1st defendant performed the marriage of plaintiff in August, 1997 without any dowry or gifts and that she left with her husband with clean hands. The 1st defendant has got ancestral properties and out of them he purchased some other properties. The 1st defendant, his mother and his brother partitioned their ancestral properties by virtue of a registered partition deed, dated 04.02.2004, vide Document No.350 of 2004, out of them 1st defendant got “B” schedule properties in the said partition. The ancestral properties which were acquired under partition by 1st defendant are in joint possession and enjoyment of plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 to 3. The plaintiff is also one of the co-sharers in the joint family properties, even she got married and that she is entitled to 1/4th share in the plaint schedule properties and that she placed the matter before the elders for which 1st defendant not accepted for partition. Then the plaintiff got issued a legal notice, dated 21.08.2010 and 1st defendant received the same, but he did not respond and that the plaintiff is constrained to file the suit for partition.

7. The 1st defendant filed written statement before the trial Court and the same was adopted by the 2nd defendant. The brief averments in the written statement are as follows:

The marriage of the plaintiff and 3rd defendant performed in 1997 and 2008 respectively by the 1st defendant by spending huge amounts and also presented lanchanums. The 1st defendant paid cash of Rs.9,00,000/- in two installments out of the joint family properties towards the share of plaintiff and that the plaintiff purchased an extent of Ac.1-00 cents in R.S.No.198/1A of Chanamilli village by virtue of sale deed, dated 16.07.2001 with the amount presented by the 1st defendant for Rs.3,00,000/- in 2004. The 1st defendant had given remaining amount of Rs.6,00,000/- by selling Ac.1-20 cents of land, which is part and parcel of plaint “D” schedule properties, with the said amount, the plaintiff purchased Ac.2-00 cents of land at Chanamilli in the name of Ambati Naga Venkata Seshagiri Rao, who is husband of plaintiff, 1st defendant settled Ac.1-05 ½ cents of wet land, which is part and parcel of Item No.1 of plaint schedule property to 3rd defendant in the year 2008 towards his share in the joint family properties. The 1st defend