The court affirmed that properties inherited under the Hindu Succession Act are ancestral unless proven otherwise, emphasizing the burden of proof on those claiming self-acquisition.

JUDGMENT:

The present Appeal is directed by appellant/defendant No.2 against the judgment and decree (hereinafter will be referred as ‘impugned judgment’) dated 14.07.2023 in O.S.No.39 of 2022 (Old O.S.No.7 of 2018), on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Narayanpet (hereinafter will be referred as ‘trial Court’), whereby the suit for partition was preliminarily decreed.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter are referred to as they were arrayed before the trial Court.

3. The brief facts of the case are that Plaintiff Nos.1 to 4 filed the main suit vide O.S.No.7/2018 on the file of II Additional District Court (FTC) Mahabubnagar against defendant Nos.1 to 3 seeking partition of the suit schedule properties. Subsequently the case was renumbered as O.S.No.39 of 2022 on the file of learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Narayanpet. The contentions of the plaintiffs as can be seen from the plaint averments in O.S.No.39 of 2022 are as under:

a) Plaintiff Nos.1 to 4 and defendant No.3, who are the daughters and defendant No.2, who is the son, are the children of defendant No.1 and deceased Katrapaly Manemma. The father of defendant No.1 by name Sai Reddy acquired Sl.No.1 to 8 of suit ‘A’ schedule of properties and after his demise defendant No.1 succeeded those properties and by that time plaintiff Nos.1 to 4, defendant Nos.2 and 3 were already born, as such, they are coparceners of the suit schedule lands. Sl. No.9 of suit ‘A’ schedule land and Sl.No.10 of ‘B’ schedule house plots were acquired in the name of Katrpally Manemma, who died intestate leaving behind her, plaintiff Nos.1 to 4 and defendant Nos.1 to 3 as her lelgal heirs as per Section 15 of Hindu Succession Act. The plaintiffs and defendants are equal share holders.

b) All the suit schedule properties are the joint family properties of the plaintiffs and defendants and they are in joint possession of the same without any partition by metes and bounds. Plaintiffs and defendant No.3 are married but their possession over the suit schedule premises is constructive possession along with defendant Nos.1 and 2.

c) Defendant No.1 having attained the age of more than 75 years on several occasions was prepared to settle the suit schedule properties but at the instance of defendant No.2, no steps were taken for division of suit schedule properties. On 28.12.2017 when the plaintiffs demanded for partition, defendant Nos.1 and 2 did not agreed to effect partition of the suit schedule properties, hence, this suit.

4. In reply to the above plaint averments, defendant No.3 failed to contest the suit despite receipt of summons from the Court and on the other hand, defendant Nos.1 and 2 filed their joint written statement. The brief averments of written statement filed by defendant Nos.1 and 2 are as under:

a) Sl. Nos.1 to 4, 6 to 9 of suit ‘A’ schedule lands and other landed properties at Jaklair and Katevpally villages of Makthal Mandal are self acquired properties of defendant No.1 having purchased the same from B. Buchja Reddy. Hence, defendant No.1 has got absolute rights and exclusive ownership over the said properties. Neither plaintiff Nos.1 to 4 nor defendant Nos.2 and 3 have got any share in Sl. Nos.1 to 4, 6 to 9 of suit ‘A’ schedule lands. Defendant No.2 dug borewells and installed electricity motors with his own earnings, as such, the plaintiffs and defendant No.3 have no right or share in the suit ‘C’ schedule property.

b) Smt. Katrapally Manemma is the absolute owner of Sl.No.5 of suit ‘A’ schedule property and item No.10 of suit ‘B’ schedule plot, as such, plaintiff Nos.1 to 4 and defendant Nos.1 to 3 are nothing to do with the said land and house plot. Smt. Manemma purchased Sl.No.10 of suit ‘B’ schedule property through registered sale deed bearing document No.831/2002 dated 26.06.2002 from her father by name V. Venkat Ram Reddy and joint paternal uncle by name Anantha Reddy. Similarly, Smt. Manemma purchased Sl. No.5 of suit ‘A’ schedule p