THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI

ORDER:

This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner-defendant No.1 aggrieved by the order dated 18.10.2022 in I.A. No.515 of 2022 in O.S. No.77 of 2016 passed by the Principal District Judge at Bhongir.

2. The respondent No.5-plaintiff filed the suit for partition claiming half share each in the suit schedule properties along with defendant No.1. Her contention was that her father acquired the suit schedule properties, total admeasuring Acs.28.24 gts., situated at Basanthapur Village, Rajapet Mandal, Nalgonda District from his father in a partition with his brothers towards his share and that her father died intestate leaving the plaintiff, her sister-defendant No.1 and their mother, by name, Rukkamma. In the said property, she along with defendant No.1 were entitled to 4/9^th shares each and their mother Rukkamma was entitled for 1/9^th share. Her further contention was that the defendant No.2 and late Krishna Reddy were her sons, and they stealthily got mutated patta of the suit schedule property on their names equally without the knowledge and consent of the plaintiff. The mother of the plaintiff i.e. Rukkamma was not having any exclusive right to execute any document in favour of defendant No.2 and late Krishna Reddy and even if any document was executed, it would not confer any rights to the defendant No.2 and she demanded defendant No.2 and late Krishna Reddy for cancellation of registered documents and for partition and separate possession of her due share. The wife and children of Krishna Reddy were shown as defendant Nos.3 to 5.

3. The defendant No.1 filed written statement sailing with the plaintiff admitting the case of the plaintiff and reporting no objection to pass a preliminary decree by allotting half share in the suit schedule properties.

4. The defendant Nos.2 to 5 filed a common written statement contending that the defendant No.2 and his brother late Krishna Reddy were both the sons of plaintiff. The suit schedule properties pertain to their grandfather (mother’s father) Mendu China Jogi Reddy and got partitioned between him and his brother late Krishna Reddy before the village elders in the year 1996 and the properties were mutated in their names. Since then, they were enjoying their half share in the suit schedule properties. After the demise of late Krishna Reddy, defendant Nos.3 to 5, wife and children of late Krishna Reddy, were enjoying the half share. There was no joint family among the plaintiff and defendant Nos.2 to 5. The defendant Nos.2 and 3 were maintaining the plaintiff by providing food, shelter and giving money to her as per her interest and she was not entitled to seek partition in the suit schedule property. They further contended that the plaintiff was aged more than 80 years and the defendant Nos.2 to 5 were taking responsibility of her health and livelihood. The property was acquired by the plaintiff from her father. Her husband came as illatom to her parents’ house and the suit schedule properties were devolved on him. The sister of the plaintiff, who was defendant No.1, was residing in her in-laws’ house after her marriage, as such, she was having no right on the said property. The father of the plaintiff also provided sufficient means to her at the time of her marriage and prayed to dismiss the suit.

5. Basing on the said pleadings, issues were framed and the matter was posted for trial.

6. During the course of trial, the plaintiff was examined as PW.1 and the defendant No.1 was examined as DW.1. When the matter was posted for the evidence of defendant Nos.2 to 5, at that stage, defendant Nos.2 to 5 filed I.A. No.515 of 2022 under Order VIII Rule 1A read with Section 151 of CPC, to receive certain documents. Along with the petition, defendant No.2 filed an affidavit stating that while he was searching old papers, he found two registered gift settlement deeds vide document Nos.404 of 1985 and 405 of 1985, both dated 25.04.1985, executed by