JRAMBAI Vs. G H SHIV KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed against the order dated 21-11-2008 passed by the Court of III Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar in I.A. No. 171 of 2008 in A.S. No. 76 of 2005. Through the order under appeal, the lower appellate Court reviewed its judgment and decree dated 25-01-2008 passed in A.S. No. 76 of 2005 arose out of O.S. No. 374 of 1994 on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, filed by the 1st respondent herein. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed in the suit before the trial Court.

(2.) The sole plaintiff filed the suit against the defendants for the relief of partition of Suit - A and B Schedule properties. Suit - A Schedule comprised of four items, out of which, Items - 1 and 2 are house properties, whereas Items - 3 and 4 are the lands measuring Acs. 2-28 guntas and Acs. 16-14 guntas, respectively, situated at Macha Bollaram Revenue Village, Ranga Reddy District. Suit - B Schedule comprised of the belongings of late Bansilal in the bank locker and his account in a bank. The 1st defendant' is the wife of late Bansilal. The sole plaintiff and defendants 2, 3 and 4 are their daughters and defendants 5, 6, 7 and 8 are their sons. The plaintiff pleaded that late Bansilal died leaving the suit schedule properties and that she is entitled for a share in it along with the defendants. Through its judgment dated 29-04-2005, the trial Court passed a preliminary decree directing that the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 8 shall be entitled to 1/9th share each in Items - 1 and 3 of Suit - A Schedule properties. It was held that Item - 4 of Suit - A Schedule property was sold and that the parties would be entitled to 1/9th share each in the sale proceeds thereof. Suit was dismissed as regards the other items of Suit - A Schedule properties and the entire items of Suit - B Schedule properties.

(3.) Defendants 1 and 5 to 8 i.e., the mother and brothers of the sole plaintiff preferred A.S. No. 76 of 2005 in the lower appellate Court challenging the preliminary decree. Through its judgment dated 25-01-2008, the lower appellate Court allowed the appeal in part. Items 1 and 3 of Suit - A schedule are treated as ancestral in nature and accordingly available for partition. The plaintiff and defendants 2 to 4 i.e., daughters were held to be entitled to 1/45th share in each of those Items and the sale proceeds of Item - 4 of Suit - A schedule properties.