CHILAKAPATI SRINIVASA RAO Vs. TANETI NALLAYYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals arise out of the common judgment in OS Nos.4 and 5 of 1980 dated 29/03/1985 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Bhimavaram. O.S.No.4 of 1980 was originally filed by Kusuma Krishnaiah against Chilakapati Gangamma, seeking partition of the schedule properties into two equal shares. Pending the suit, both the plaintiff and defendant died and the appellant was brought on record as the legal representative of the defendant and the respondents I to 3 as the legal representatives of the plaintiff. Similarly, O.S.No.5 of 1980 was filed by Chilakapati Gangamma against Kusuma Krishnaiah seeking a declaration of her right and for recovery of possession of the suit land. On the similar lines as in O.S.No.4 of 1980, the parties having died, the legal representatives were brought on record.

(2.) The claim of the plaintiff in OSNo.4 of 1980 is that the plaint schedule properties belonged to late Chilakapati Surayya, S/o Swamy, who executed a registered will deed dated 6-4-1958 in a sound and disposing state of mind and subsequently, he died on 18-7-1969. The original plaintiff is the sister's son and defendant No.1 is the wife's sister's son of late Surayya and defendant No.2 is the wife of Surayya. The properties being in joint possession and some attempts being made to secrete away, the suit was filed for partition.

(3.) Defendant No.1 in the written statement claimed that he was adopted by the defendant No.2 and late Surayya when he was a child and thus known as the adopted son of late Surayya and defendant No.2. Surayya and the defendants are the members of the joint family and during the life time of Surayya itself some properties were given to the plaintiff like bullock-cart and bullocks etc., after acknowledgment. However, by the date of the death of Surayya, none of those were existing. Since the defendant No.2 has a right of maintenance in the schedule properties, the will deed dated 6-4-1958 contemplates that the plaintiff and the defendant No.1 should enjoy the properties only after the death of Gangamma. Therefore, the rights of Gangamma in the properties have become enlarged and she became the absolute owner of those properties. She executed a will deed on 5-5-1972 bequeathing the properties to defendant No.1