SMT. M.G. SHARADA BAI Vs. SMT. MYTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material placed on record, this Court is clearly of the view that on the facts and in the peculiar circumstances of the present case, the applications filed on behalf of the petitioner No.4 of this writ petition, who is defendant No.5 in the suit for partition and separate possession filed by the plaintiff/respondent (O.S.No.5062/2008), for reopening of the case and permission to lead further evidence, deserve to be granted on the terms of costs and with other conditions for expeditious proceedings; and the impugned order dated 06.12.2017, as passed by the Trial Court, in rejecting such a prayer, calls for interference.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the relevant background aspects of the matter are that the plaintiff/respondent filed this suit for partition and separate possession in the year 2008, in relation to the properties said to have been left by late Shri. M.H. Gangadhar, father of the plaintiff and defendant Nos. 25. The children of the deceased son of late Shri. M.H. Gangadhar are joined as Defendants 3 &4 in this suit. The defendant No. 1 in the suit was the mother of plaintiff and her siblings, who appears to have expired after filing of the written statement. In the suit so filed, the plaintiff-respondent has asserted, inter alia, that the suit schedule property was a joint family property and she was having equal right/share therein; and the same was yet to be divided between the parties. The plaintiff indicated her apprehension that defendant No. 1 (her mother) was making hectic efforts to bequeath the property through a Will to one of her daughters and grandson; and alleged that the mother was not entitled to make any such bequest.

(3.) In the written statement filed by the defendant Nos 1 to 4, it has, inter alia, been asserted that defendant No. 1 had executed a registered Will as per her wish and the same shall have legal force upon her demise, though she was having legal right even to cancel and execute her last Will. The other averments of the plaint and denial thereof need not be dilated for the purpose of this order.