HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE NO.: S.A.No.325 of 2021
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl. Date ORDER OFFICE
No. NOTE
2. 01.09.2021 MVR,J Tr. to I-
O folder
I.A.No.1 of 2021 before
correcti
The respondents 2 and 3 are served. Service against ons if
any.
them is sufficient. None represented them. Pl.verify
.
Postal endorsement shows that the 1st respondent is no more.
Sri K.Chidambaram, learned counsel for the petitioner represents that the respondents 2 and 3 are the only legal representatives of the 1st respondent, which fact is recorded.
Heard Sri K.Chidambaram, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Accepting the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition making out sufficient cause explaining the delay, the delay of 92 days in filing the second appeal is condoned.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed.
______ MVR,J S.A.No.325 of 2021 In view of the submission of Sri K.Chidambaram, learned counsel for the appellant recorded in I.A.No.1 of 2021 that the respondents 2 and 3 are the only legal representatives of the 1st respondent, though the 1st respondent died. This fact is recorded.
Registry is directed to note that the 1st respondent is no more and he is represented by the respondents 2 and 3. Upon consideration of the decrees and judgments of the trial Court as well as the 1st appellate Court, since the following substantial questions of law arise for determination in the second appeal, ADMIT.
Contd...
1. Whether the reasoning given by the courts below for discarding Exs.A1, A2, A6 and A7 can be sustained when the said documents are presumed to be true until the contrary is proved as per Section 6 of the A.P.Rights in land and Pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971?
2. Whether the findings of the courts below insofar as the possession of the suit schedule property is concerned can be sustained in the absence of consideration of Exs.A3 to A7? Issue notice to the respondents. List the matter on 26.10.2021.
______ MVR,J I.A.No.2 of 2021 Notice.
______ MVR,J Pab