Eswaramma vs. Lakshminarasamma
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
For Admission
Before:
Hon'ble B S Bhanumathi
Listed On:
10 Mar 2022
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
MAIN CASE NO: S.A.No.98 of 2022
PROCEEDING SHEET
| Sl.No. | Date | ORDER | OFFICE NOTE |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3. | 10.03.2022 | BSB, J | |
| Heard<br>learned<br>counsel<br>for<br>the | |||
| appellant. | |||
| The suit was filed for partition of | |||
| two items of suit scheduled<br>properties. | |||
| The suit was decreed in respect of item | |||
| No.1 dismissed with regard to Item No.2. | |||
| The<br>defendants<br>1,<br>3<br>and<br>5 | |||
| preferred the appeal, the appeal was | |||
| allowed.<br>Thus<br>the<br>aggrieved | |||
| plaintiff/respondents 1, 2 and 4 preferred | |||
| the<br>second<br>appeal.<br>In<br>view<br>of<br>the | |||
| following substantial questions of law. | |||
| (a) (a)<br>Whether, on the facts and in the | |||
| circumstances of the case, the reversing | |||
| Judgment of the Lower Appellate Court is | |||
| vitiated in that its approach is essentially | |||
| erroneous<br>and<br>its<br>conclusions<br>were | |||
| founded<br>on<br>surmises<br>and<br>conjectures | |||
| without any factual or legal basis ignoring | |||
| and misreading the evidence on record, | |||
| especially evidences of PW1 and PW2. | |||
| (b) (b)<br>Weather, on the facts and in the | |||
| circumstances<br>of<br>the<br>case<br>the<br>lower | |||
| appellate court is right in reversing the | |||
| well considered judgment and decree of | |||
| the trial court which was rendered<br>after | |||
| appreciating the demeanor of witness and | |||
| decreed the suit partially for partition and | |||
| the lower appellate court right in that no | |||
| specific finding that the judgment and | |||
| decree<br>of the trial court is perverse, | |||
| contrary to material on record. | |||
| (c)<br>Whether,<br>on<br>the<br>facts<br>and<br>the |
circumstances of the case the lower appellate court is right in reversing the judgment and decree of the trial court on the ground that the plaintiffs did not challenge the Pattadar Pass Book (Ex.B,3) and Title Deed (Ex.B.4) which are not conclusive proof of title and did not determine the title of the defendants unless contrary is proved.
ADMIT.
Notice to respondents 1 to 5. Post on 06.04.2022.
In the meanwhile, learned counsel for the appellant is permitted to take out personal service of notice through RPAD and file proof thereof.
I.A.No.1 of 2022
In view of the merits prima facie shown in favour of the petitioner/appellant noted above, it is a fit matter to grant the order of Status Quo to be maintained by the respondents.
Notice to respondents 1 to 5.
Learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant is permitted to take out personal service of notice through RPAD and file proof thereof.
Post on 06.04.2022.
Till then the respondents 1 to 5 shall maintain Status Quo of the schedule properties as on today to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, if any alienation or alteration is made to the schedule property.
_________________ B.S.BHANUMATHI,J
ssp