The court emphasized the propounder's burden to prove wills amidst suspicious circumstances, noting that failure to authenticate a will nullifies claims of ownership based on that instrument.

JUDGMENT:

This Appeal, under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure [for short „the C.P.C.’], is filed by the Appellants/defendant Nos.1 and 2 challenging the Decree and Judgment, dated 27.03.2006, in O.S.No.03 of 1998 passed by the learned III Additional District Judge, Guntur [for short „the tr ial Court’].

2. The appellants herein are the defendant Nos.1 and 2 and the Respondent No.1 herein is the plaintiff in O.S.No.03 of 1998 and the respondent Nos.2 to 9 are the defendants in the said suit. During the pendency of the appeal, the respondent No.1 died and his Legal Representatives were brought on record as respondent Nos.10 to 14.

3. Originally, the respondent No.1/plaintiff herein filed the suit in O.S.No.03 of 1998 against the defendants seeking for declaration of title over the plaint schedule properties and for delivery of possession of Item Nos.2 to 9 of the same and mesne profits from 13.01.1998 onwards over the plaint schedule properties till the delivery of possession of the properties situated at Prattipadu, and for consequential permanent injunction in respect of item No.1 of the plaint schedule house property.

4. Both parties in the Appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed before the trial Court.

5. The case of the plaintiff/respondent No.1 as per the plaint averments in O.S.No.03 of 1998, in brief, is as follows:

Originally, the plaint schedule item Nos.1 to 4 belongs to one Kakani Appaiah of Prattipadu Village and the said Appaiah married one Bullemma, who is the 2^nd daughter Gorijavolu Rosaiah and Seshamma, and the said Gorijavolu Rosaiah and Seshamma gave birth to three (03) male children by names Venkatapaiah, Raghavaiah and Ananda Rao and four (04) female children Rushiyamma, Bullemma, Seetharavamma and Tulasamma. The plaintiff further pleaded that the 3^rd daughter of Gorijavolu Rosaiah and Seshamma, by name Seetharavamma was given in marriage to one Ginjupalli Veeraiah and the said Ginjupalli Veeraiah and Seetharavamma had three (03) male children and the plaintiff is the eldest son of their male children

The plaintiff further pleaded that he is none other than the younger sister‟s son of Kakani Bullemma alias Annapurnamma and the said Appaiah and Bullemma have only one daughter by name Anasuyamma and she was given in marriage to her maternal uncle by name Gorijavolu Ragavaiah. The 3^rd son of Gorijavolu Rosaiah and Seshamma, by name Gorijavolu Ananda Rao has got one daughter by name Konduru Sesharatnam and one son by name Gorijavolu Syamsundar Rao through his 1^st wife by name Lakshmayamma and also got five sons. The said Kakani Appaiah during his lifetime executed a registered Will dated 09.04.1962, bequeathing his properties i.e. plaint „A‟ schedule properties to his wife Bullemma and the plaint „B‟ schedule properties were given to his daughter Gorijavolu Anasuyamma and subsequently, the said Kakani Appaiah died in the year 1969. The plaintiff further pleaded that after the demise of the said Appaiah, his wife Bullemma resided with his brother Raghavaiah and her daughter Gorijavolu Anasuyamma, till the death of Raghavaiah in the year 1974, and the said Bullemma and Anasuyamma never partitioned the properties covered under the Will dated 09.04.1962, said to have been executed by Kakani Appaiah and all the properties which are covered under the said Will were looked after by the said Raghavaiah during his lifetime.

The plaintiff further pleaded that Gorijavolu Anasuyamma, after the demise of her mother Bullemma, further looked after her entire properties till the year 1987 and the defendant No.3 herein, who is none o