GUNDLURU SREENIVASULU Vs. GUNDLURU BHAGYAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant Nos.5 and 6 in the suit filed the present civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by order, dtd. 10/3/2022 passed in I.A.No.39 of 2022 in O.S.No.52 of 2009 on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Piler.

(2.) Respondent herein being the plaintiff filed O.S.No.52 of 2009 on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Piler, to declare that plaintiff has got right and title over 3/4th share in 'A' schedule properties and half share in 'B' schedule properties and to partition and deliver possession of the same etc.

(3.) In the plaint, plaintiff contended inter alia that she is wife of the deceased and defendant No.1 in the suit is mother of deceased Subramanyam Achari; that 'A' schedule properties are ancestral and joint family properties of Subramanyam Achari and his son Nagendra; that both are having half share; that Nagendra, died intestate, unmarried, on 18/5/1994 leaving behind him the plaintiff as sole legal heir; that plaintiff succeeded to his half share in 'A' schedule properties; that Subramanyam Achari, husband of the plaintiff died intestate on 24/7/1996 leaving behind the plaintiff and defendant No.1 in the suit as his legal heirs; thus, plaintiff got 3/4th share in 'A' schedule property and that defendant No.1 is entitled for remaining 1/4th share of 'A' schedule properties; that 'B' schedule properties are self acquired properties of deceased Subramanyam Achari and hence, both defendant No.1 and plaintiff are entitled to half share; that defendant No.1 got issued legal notice claiming entire property and denied share to the respondent/plaintiff under Will, dtd. 28/2/1992 said to have been executed by deceased Subramanyam Achari; that Subramanyam Achari filed O.P.No.17 of 1989 and obtained ex parte decree of divorce behind the back of the plaintiff; that plaintiff initiated steps to get the decree set aside and the same is pending; that item No.1 of 'B' schedule property is in the custody of defendant Nos.2 and 3 and item No.2 is in the custody of defendant No.4; that defendant No.1 is trying to claim the entire amounts lying with other defendants. Hence, suit was filed.