R RAMACHANDRA NAIDU Vs. MUNIRATHNAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner filed this revision against the decree and order passed in E.A.No. 1135 of 1989 inO.E.P.No. 352 of 1988 dated 28-11-1995 on the file of the I Additional District Munsif, Chittoor in dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 146 C.P.C. to come on record as the 2nd petitioner in the execution petition and as legal representative of the deceased decreeholder.

(2.) The brief facts leading to the filing of the revision are as follows: Late R. Ramachandra Naidu filed O.E.P. 352 of 1988 on the file of the I Additional District Munsif, Chittoor against the respondents and while the execution petition was pending, he died. Thereupon, the revision petitioner Smt. T. Padma filed E.A.No. 1135 of 1989 to implead her as 2nd petitioner as she is legal representative of the deceased decreeholder. The respondents- judgmentdebtors filed counter denying the averment that she is daughter of R. Ramachandra Naidu. The wife of late Ramachandra Naidu predeceased and there are no legal heirs and therefore the respondents opposed the petition filed by the revision petitioner.

(3.) The revision petitioner examined herself as P.W. 1 and marked Ex.A-1 to A-4. Smt. R.M. Rajamma examined herself as R.W. 1 and Ex.B-1 was marked. After considering the entire material on record, the 1st Additional District Munsif, Chittoor dismissed the petition without costs on the ground that the petitioner failed to prove that she is daughter of the deceased- decreeholder.