C E SULOCHANA Vs. C E SATHYANARAYANA REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHETHER even on the Plaint averments the Suit is to be rejected is the question raised for consideration in this Application.

(2.) THE respondent/plaintiff has filed the Suit for partition and separate possession of his l/5th share in the Suit Schedule Items (1) and (2) properties on the basis that the properties are the joint family properties of his father C.E. Reddi and therefore, he is entitled to 1/5th share. THE first defendant/C.E. Sulochana has filed this Application to reject the Plaint. For convenience, the Parties are referred to in their original rank in the Suit.

(3.) CONTENDING that the earlier Suit in O.S. No. 8620 of 1996 was not a Suit for Partition, but a Suit for Mandatory Injunction to reconstruct the demolished portion of the compound wall and therefore, the finding in the said Suit is not binding on the plaintiff and the said judgment would not operate as res judicata, the plaintiff has filed the counter affidavit.