A APPARAO Vs. K AMMORU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment and decree of I Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam in A.S.No.20 of 1990 dated 14-7-1995 confirming the judgment and decree passed on 25-7-1989 by the Principal Subordinate Judge, Visakhapatnam in O.S.No. 35 of 1982 are in challenge in this Second Appeal.

(2.) The appellant claims to be the plaintiff in the suit having been brought on record on the death of the original plaintiff Korada Appamma whereas the respondents are the defendants in the suit. The suit was filed for partition and separate possession of the alleged one-half or 1/12th share of the plaintiff in plaint 'A' and 'B' schedule properties. The suit for partition was resisted by the defendants. The following issues were tried by the trial Court.

(3.) The main ground in the appeal raising the substantial question of law and canvassed on behalf of the appellant by the learned Counsel for the appellant is that instead of holding that there is no plea or averment in the plaint in regard to the Will between the principal plaintiff and the present appellant, impleaded him as Plaintiff No.2, and without adverting to the evidence in the case in support of the Will, the learned District Judge has given a finding in the negative and against the appellant and that is sufficient to vitiate the judgment. The learned advocate for the respondents submits that there is no reason to interfere with the judgment and decree of the Courts below as they are findings of facts and no question of (law) substantial in nature arises to be considered in this second appeal.