RAVIPUDI SUBBARAVAMMA Vs. GORANTLA SUBBA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three civil misce llaneous second appeals are connected and, therefore, it is convenient to dispose of the same by a common judgment.

(2.) The 2nd respondent is the father in-law of the 1st appellant. The husband of the 1st appellant died somewhere in the year 1979. The 2nd appellant is the daughter of the 1st appellant. The property, which is the subject-matter of these civil miscellaneous second appeals, is an extent of Ac.2.25 cents and belongs to the joint family consisting of the 2nd respondent, the deceased husband of the 1st appellant and another son of the 2nd respondent. Inasmuch as there are three coparceners, the share of the 1st appellant's deceased husband will be 1 /3rd. Consequent to the death of the 1st appellant's husband, 1/3rd share in the undivided 1/3rd share of this son devolved upon his mother, another 1 /3rd on the 1st appellant and yet another 1/3rd on the 2nd appellant. That is how the 1st and 2nd appellants have become vested in 2/9th share of the total property.

(3.) The 1st respondent is a creditor of the 2nd respondent and filed three suits, O.S.Nos. 84/80, 85/80 and 86/80, for various sums against the 2nd respondent and obtained decrees on 27-12 1980. Thereafter, he filed E P.Nos 138/81, 139/81 and 140/81 for executing the said decrees in the abovesaid three suits At that st?ge, the 1st appellant filed a suit for partition (0 S No.2/81) and obtained a preliminary decree on 31-8-1981 and a final decree on 28-1-1982. The 1st respondent, who is the creditor-decree-holder, was not made a party to the suit for partition. Between the date of the preliminary decree and the date of the final decree in the partition suit, the 1st rpspondent- creditor attached the entire family property of Ac 2-25 cents inclusive ol the shares of the two appellants before me on 19-10-1981. It is represented that the total amount due under the three decrees is Rs.13,000/- and odd. It is contended by Sri A. Venkataramana, the learned Counsel for the appellants, that the said decretal amounts can be discharged even if the father's share in the joint family property viz. 1/3rd is brought to sale by the creditor.