THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA APPEAL SUIT NOs.2618 OF 2001 AND 113 OF 2005

COMMON JUDGMENT:

A.S.No.2618 of 2001 and A.S.No.113 of 2005 are filed against the judgment and decree in O.S.No.112 of 1990 on the file of Senior Civil Judge at Karimnagar. O.S.No.112 of 1990 was filed by the plaintiff against defendant Nos.1 to 10 for partition and separate possession of 2/3^rd share of plaint schedule properties. For the sake of convenience the parties hereinafter referred to as arrayed in O.S.No.112 of 1990.

2. The facts of the case are that plaintiff is the adopted son of late Polasa Shankaraiah. He was duly adopted by late Shankaraiah and his wife who is the 2^nd defendant in the suit on 27.02.1978 by performing necessary ceremonies in their house. The 1^st defendant is mother and 2^nd defendant is widow of late Shankaraiah. Therefore, the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 are his legal heirs under Hindu Succession Act and they have succeeded to his properties. Further the properties described in the plaint are allotted to the exclusive share of late Shankaraiah in a partition which are his ancestral joint family properties between himself, his four brothers and the mother i.e, 1^st defendant in the year 1965. Late Shankaraiah sold agricultural lands of Marripalli Village i.e., item Nos.7 to 11 of annexure and plot No.7-2-33 of Vemulawada during his life time and constructed a house in item No.13 of the annexure. Late Shankaraiah constructed house in the plot at Karimnagar and all the properties were in the hands of late Shankaraiah. Plaintiff held half share and late Shankaraiah held remaining half share during his life time. After the death of Shankaraiah, half share in the said properties devolved on the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 with equal shares, since plaintiff was minor at the time of death of Shankaraiah and 2nd defendant was managing the properties after his death, she sold house at Vemulawada to Mulkala Ramakishan and Mulkala Laxmaiah, through registered sale deed. She also sold land in item Nos.4 and 5, sold 10 guntas of house site in Sy.No.1394 of Vemulawada in the year 1980-81 through a registered sale deed in favour of third persons and provident fund and gratuity etc., are received by her on account of the death of Shankaraiah who was a teacher which were kept in fixed deposit, described as ‘C’ schedule property of which plaintiff is entitled to 2/3^rd share and defendants 1 and 2 are entitled for 1/6th share each and they are in joint possession of the same. The plaintiff was studying medicine at that time in Hyderabad and 2^nd defendant put forth a proposal in the month of January, 1990 that he should marry defendant No.5 who is her brother’s daughter, but plaintiff rejected the said proposal. As such, the 2^nd defendant became inimical to the plaintiff. The plaintiff came to know that the 2^nd defendant sold suit schedule house to 3^rd defendant through a registered sale deed, which is not binding on him and he is entitled to declare the said sale deed as not binding on him and for recovery of 2/3rd share for partition. Schedule ‘B’ and ‘C’ properties are still in joint possession. As such, plaintiff is entitled for 2/3rd share in the said properties, defendants 1 and 2 are entitled for 1/6^th share each. Further, as the 2^nd defendant was likely to create false and fictitious documents in favour of defendants 4 and 5 to deprive the plaintiff’s share, he requested for partition of the suit schedule properties.

3. The 1^st defendant-mother of late Shankaraiah filed written statement stating that plaintiff was adopted son of late Shankaraiah and 2^nd defendant and a registered document was also executed. Late Shankaraiah died intestate, as such, plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 are the legal heirs of late Shankaraiah. During the life time of Shankaraiah, he sold agricultural lands and all the contentions of plaintiff was accepted by the 1^st defendant and it was a consent written statement.

4. The 2nd defendant-wife o