1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments? : Yes

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reporters/Journals? : Yes

3. Whether His Lordship wishes to see the fair copy of the Judgment? : Yes

Counsel for Appellants : Mr. G. Anandam

Counsel for respondents : Mr. Kowturu Pavan Kumar

GIST:

HEAD NOTE:

Cases referred

(2009) 6 SCC 99

(2017) 5 SCC 483

(2022) 18 SCC 470

(1999) 1 SCC 141

(2005) 6 SCC 705

(2023) 5 SCC 627

(2020) 9 Supreme Court Cases 1

:: JUDGMENT ::

This is an appeal filed by the defendant Nos.1 & 2, being aggrieved by the judgment and decree, dated 13.08.2009 passed in O.S.No.03 of 2002 by the learned XII Additional Senior Civil Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Secunderabad (for short “the trial Court”).

The parties shall be referred herein as per their array in the original suit for the brevity and better understanding of the case.

The suit has been filed by the plaintiff seeking for partition of the properties in respect of Schedule-A and Schedule-B properties by granting a decree of 1/6th share in favour of the plaintiff and also to grant separate possession.

The brief averments of the plaint are that the plaintiff and the defendant Nos.1 and 2 are the sons, defendant Nos.3 and 4 are the daughters and defendant No.5 is the wife of late Sri G. Mallesham.

It is the assertion of the plaintiff that their father Sri G.Mallesham has purchased the Schedule-A property in favour of the plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 to 5 jointly during his life time vide registered Sale Deed dated 27.12.1985 and also purchased Schedule-B property by his own funds, and that Sri G. Mallesham i.e., the father of the plaintiff along with defendant Nos.1 to 4 and husband of defendant No.5, has built two houses on the Schedule A & B properties. It is asserted by the plaintiff that the suit Schedule-A and B properties are self acquired properties of their father Sri G. Mallesham, who died intestate on 03.05.1998.

Further, it is contended by the plaintiff that in view of the intestate death of Late Sri G. Mallesham, the plaintiff along with defendant Nos.1 to 5 who are the only surviving legal heirs of Sri G.Mallesham, have succeeded to the suit schedule properties and are entitled 1/6th share each under Schedule-B property by virtue of succession and that since the said Schedule-A property was purchased jointly in favour of the plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 to 5, the plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 to 5 are entitled to 1/6th share. Thus in all both the properties the plaintiff claims 1/6th share and as the defendant Nos.1 and 2 who are the brothers refused to give her share of amount to the plaintiff from rental collections and are trying to deprive the legitimate right of the plaintiff though there was demand for partition of the suit Schedule-A and B properties by the plaintiff which was refused by defendant Nos.1 and 2. The plaintiff got issued a legal notice on 08.07.2001 demanding her share out of the schedule properties and the defendants though received the said legal notice, have neither come forward to allot the share of the plaintiff, nor have given any reply. Therefore, the plaintiff was constrained to file the suit before the learned XIII Additional Senior Civil Judge (City Civil Court at Secunderabad) and sought partition of the Schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ properties and separate possession of Schedule-A and B properties by granting a decree by allotting 1/6th share to the plaintiff by metes and bounds.

The defendant Nos.1 and 2, though filed different written statement, as a sum and substance of their defence in the instant suit is that, the plaintiff is the elder sister of the said defendant Nos.1 and 2, and defendant Nos.3 and 4 are the other sisters and defendant No.5 is their mother. It is also admitted by the defendant Nos.1 and 2 that their father died intestate on 03.05.1998. Further, it is contended that the plaintiff left the parental house in 1991 and thereafter, she started living separa