K KUSUMA KUMARI Vs. G SURYA BHAGAWAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Against the common judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court in A.S.No.77of 1988 and cross objections and also C.R.P.Nos.6986 of 1980 and 919 of 1983, these two Letters Patent Appeals were filed by the plaintiff (L.P.A. No.2 of 1989) and Defendant Nos.3 and 4 (LPA No.100 of 1989).

(2.) One Padmaraju, a leading businessman of Visakhapatnam, is the father of the parties to the suit - O.S. No. 160 of 1978 instituted by Smt. Kolluri Kusuma Kumari in the Court of the III Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam seeking a decree for division into four shares of 'stridhana properties' - gold and silver jewellery- belonging to her late mother and for delivery of one share to her. Grandhi Surya Bhagavan, the first defendant in the suit, is her brother and Smt. Maddula Savitri, Kolluru Parvati and Kanitheti Mahalaxmi, defendants 2 to 4 respectively are her sisters. Of the three sisters, Maddula Savitri, the second defendant, remained ex parte in the suit; Defendants 3 and 4, although entered appearance through a Counsel, did not file their written statements. The suit was dismissed in so far as the silver articles were concerned on the ground that they were notin existence but a decree was granted in favour of the plaintiff by the trial judge for th share of the gold jewellery. Aggrieved by the same, the first defendant preferred A.S. No.77 of 1980 in this Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the plaintiff, Kusuma Kumari, filed an interlocutory application - E.P. No.69 of 1980 - for delivery of the jewellery, in default, to attach the properties of the first defendant or commit him in civil prison. As that application was dismissed, she preferred C.R.P. No.919 of 1983. Defendants 3 and 4 filed an interlocutory application - LA. No27 of 1980 - in the trial Court under Sections 151 and 152 C.P.C., for a preliminary decree in their favour and allotment of one share to each of them. As that application was dismissed, they preferred C.R.P. No.6986 of 1980. To the extent relief was negatived by the trial Court concerning the silver articles, theplaintiff preferred cross-objections. A learned Single Judge of this Court disposed of all the matters by a common judgment: the appeal preferred by the first defendant-A.S. No.77 of 1980 - was allowed and the suit of the plaintiff was dismissed. Conequently, the cross-objections and the two civil revision petitions were dismissed. Hence these two Letters Patent Appeals.

(3.) Padmaraju, the father of the parties to the litigation, died on 30-11-1964. He had two wives. His first wife, Ramamma, died issueless. His second wife, Suryakanthamma, the mother of the parties, died in 1950. The following table gives a clear picture of the relationship of the parties. <FRM>JUDGEMENT_132_ALT3_1995Html1.htm</FRM>