MITTAPALLY RAVIKUMAR Vs. MITTAPALLY RAMALINGAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals are filed against the judgment and preliminary decree dated 31-07-2003, passed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Miryalaguda, in O.S.No.55 of 1996. The plaintiffs in that suit filed A.S.No.1118 of 2004, and defendants 10 to 15 filed A.S.No.254 of 2008. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to, as arrayed in the suit.

(2.) Defendant No.1 is the husband of defendant No.17. Defendants 8,9 and 16 are their sons, and defendant Nos. 18 and 19 are their daughters. Defendant No.20 is the younger brother of the 1st defendant. Plaintiffs are the children of defendant No.16. Defendants 2 to 4 are children of defendant No.8, and defendants 5 to 7 are the children of defendant No.9. Defendants 10 to 15 are purchasers of an item of property.

(3.) The plaintiffs pleaded that the joint family, comprising of defendants 1,8,9 and 16, held plaint 'A', 'B' and 'C' schedule properties, and a partition has taken place in O.S.No.94 of 1989, filed by their father, the 16th defendant, in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Miryalaguda. It was stated that the 1st defendant was allotted all the items of 'A' schedule, towards his share, with a rider that, he shall be entitled to sell properties up to the value of Rs.1,50,000/-, and in case the properties of that value are sold, the remaining items will be liable to be partitioned. The plaintiffs alleged that the 1st defendant sold certain items of property, worth more than Rs.1,50,000/-, and in that view of the matter, the suit schedule properties are liable to be partitioned. Other relevant facts were also pleaded.