SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 2167

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO, J
manduva hanumantha rao – Appellant
Versus
manduva srinivasa rao – Respondent


Advocates:
N SASIKALA, MADHAVA RAO NALLURI

ORDER:

The petitioner herein, who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.374 of 2014 on the file of the Family-cum-VIII Additional District Judge, Prakasam at Ongole, filed suit for partition against the respondents/defendants. The petitioner/plaintiff and the 1st respondent/ 1st defendant are the sons of Manduva Seshaiah, born in wedlock with Venkata Subbamma.

2. In the said suit, the petitioner-plaintiff filed I.A.No.1565 of 2024 under Order 7 Rule 14(3) and Section 151 of C.P.C. to receive the original partition deed dated 26.03.1997 in the place of Ex.B.1 to compare the disputed signatures with the unregistered Will Ex.B.5 with the admitted signature i.e., Manduva Seshaiah, who is the father of the petitioner-plaintiff and 1st respondent-1st defendant, in the original partition deed, as the certified copy of the original registered partition deed cannot be compared with Ex.B.5-Will, to disprove the Will executed by Manduva Seshaiah.

3. The said application I.A.No.1565 of 2024 was dismissed by the trial Court on the ground that the petitioner is unable to explain the day- to-day delay for not filing the same and it is the duty of the petitioner to seek condonation of delay and no such explanat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top