ORAL JUDGMENT

2. This second appeal is filed against the concurrent finding.

4. The First Appellate Court having re-assessed both oral and documentary evidence available on record and keeping in view the grounds urged in the appeal, formulated the points for consideration and answered point Nos.2 and 3 in the negative considering the admission on the part of D.W.1 in the cross-examination, particularly in paragraph Nos.20, 21 and 22. In paragraph No.22, the First Appellate Court taken note of that D.W.1 in his cross-examination admitted that item Nos.1 and 2 properties are inam land and said item Nos.1 and 2 are cultivating since from their great grandfather Shanthaiah and the said item Nos.1 and 2 are granted in favour of the father of the plaintiffs and the defendants. Further, it is clear from the evidence on record that there was no partition between the plaintiffs and the defendants in respect of the suit schedule properties. The defendant No.1 spec