J KUBERA MANDADI Vs. K DORASWAMY MANDADI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants 1 to 3 in O.S. No. 35/90 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Puttur, had preferred this appeal. Respondents-plaintiffs in the aforesaid suit prayed for the relief of partition of plaint schedule properties into 4 equal shares with reference to good and bad qualities by metes and bounds and to allot 2 such shares to the plaintiffs. The suit O.S. No. 273/83 filed on the file of Principal District Munsiff, Puttur, which was numbered as O.S. No. 37/85 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Tirupati, and again, renumbered as O.S. No. 45/90 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Puttur, and, O.S. No. 83/83 on the file of Principal District Munsiff, Puttur, which was numbered as O.S. No. 35/85 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Tirupati, and renumbered as O.S. No. 44/90 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Puttur, which had been carried by way of appeals and transferred to this Court as Tr.A.S. No. 3829/2004 and 3830/2004 were not pressed by a memo and the same were dismissed by this Court as not pressed by order, dated 4-7-2005. The suit O.S. No. 287/84 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Tirupati, was numbered as O.S. No. 35/90 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Puttur, and aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree made therein, the present Appeal was preferred.

(2.) The 1st plaintiff in the suit died and plaintiffs 2 to 9 were added as legal representatives of the deceased 1 st plaintiff, as per orders in I.A. No. 639/91, dated 7-10-1991. As already referred to supra, defendants 1 to 3 in the said suit are the appellants. All the aforesaid suits were disposed of by a common Judgment passing a preliminary decree for partition granting half share to plaintiffs 2 to 9 in O.S. No. 35/90 of the entire joint family properties, covered by the plaint schedules in the aforesaid suits. Since the subject-matter being virtually the same and several of the parties being the same, the other 2 suits which were prior suits to O.S. No. 35/90 and the appeals arising therefrom had been not pressed before this Court by memo, which had been dismissed as withdrawn, as referred to supra.

(3.) The learned Subordinate Judge, Puttur, recorded the evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 3 and D.Ws. 1 to 4 and also marked Exs. B-1 to B-34 and ultimately passed a preliminary decree, as specified above. Hence, the present appeal.