Karri Pedda Suryanarayana vs Karri Devudu
2021 Latest Caselaw 2779 AP

                   HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AT AMARAVATI


MAIN CASE NO.: S.A.No.151 of 2019
                                      PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl.      Date                                    ORDER                                    OFFICE
No.                                                                                        NOTE
16.   02.08.2021   MVR,J                                                                  Tr. to I-O
                                                                                            folder
                                                                                           before
                                           S.A.No.151 of 2019                            corrections
                                                                                           if any.
                                                                                          Pl.verify.
                         Heard Ms.Madhavi Priya Mantena, learned counsel for
                   the appellant and Sri A.Radha Krishna, learned counsel for
                   the respondents.

Both the learned counsel for the parties represented that the 1st respondent is no more. Therefore, the proceedings recorded on 20.10.2020 that the appellant expired requires correction. It is clarified that the appellant is very much available and pursuing this appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant also represents that the respondents 2 and 3 are the only legal representatives of the deceased 1st respondent and that there are no other legal representatives to be brought on record. This fact is recorded.

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.

1. Whether the plaintiff can be treated as joint

and 6 and not joint family member to the rest of the suit schedule properties?

2. Whether the plaintiff is the son of the 1st defendant can his right over all the suit schedule properties can be negative in a suit for partition?

3. There mere denial of the plaintiff never lived member of joint family is accrued right over the joint family properties can be negative? Issue notice to the respondents to submit arguments in respect of above substantial questions of law(Arulmighu Nellukadai Mariamman Tirukkoil v. Tamilarasi(dead) by Lrs. (AIR 2019 SC 3027) followed).

List the matter during the second week of November, 2021 under the caption 'for final hearing'.

______ MVR,J Pab