Gottipati Anitha vs Chinnam Ayyavarlu
2021 Latest Caselaw 621 AP

           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURESH REDDY

            CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.869 of 2020

ORDER :

This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner against

the Order and decree, dated 11.2.2020 passed in I.A.No.513 of

2018 in I.A.No.38 of 2013 in O.S.No.84 of 2004 on the file of the

Court of Senior Civil Judge, Chirala, Pakasam District. The

petitioner filed the above said I.A., under Order - I, Rule 10 Code of

Civil Procedure,1908 (for short 'CPC') to implead her as 3rd

respondent in the Final Decree petition in I.A.No.38 of 2013.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the 1st respondent filed a suit

in O.S.No.84 of 2004 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge,

Chirala, against the respondents 2 & 3 seeking partition of suit

schedule properties by metes and bounds and allot his share

therein. All the parties to the above suit contested and after

elaborate trial, the trial Court has passed preliminary decree on

30.10.2008. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, 2nd

respondent herein filed an appeal and thereafter second appeal

and they were dismissed by confirming the Judgment and decree

passed in O.S.No.84 of 2004. Thereafter, 1st respondent herein

filed I.A.No.38 of 2013 for passing of Final decree. During the

pendency of Final decree petition, the petitioner herein filed I.A.513

of 2018 in I.A.No.38 of 2013 in O.S.No.84 of 2004 seeking to

implead her as 3rd respondent. The 1st respondent filed counter

contending that the 2nd respondent is none other than the father of

the petitioner herein and 2nd respondent got filed the present

petition and also O.S.No.46 of 2009 through the petitioner with

ulterior motive. He further contended that the petitioner is neither

a party to the suit in O.S.No.84 of 2004 nor a party in the final

decree proceedings, hence the petition is not maintainable and the

same has to be dismissed. After considering the material on record,

the learned trial Judge dismissed the said petition by its order,

dated 11.02.2020. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner herein filed

the present civil revision petition.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel

for the 1st respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner herein is the daughter of 2nd respondent, who is the 1st

defendant in the suit. She got certain properties by virtue of a

WILL executed by her grandfather bequeathing certain properties

in the name of the petitioner and her father, who is shown as

Defendant No.1 in the suit. As such, she has a share in the joint

family properties by virtue of a WILL and accordingly, she filed the

present petition seeking to implead her as 3rd respondent in the

Final Decree proceedings.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the 1st respondent

contended that the petitioner is neither a party to the suit in

O.S.No.84 of 2004 nor a party in the final decree proceedings,

hence the petition is not maintainable and the same has to be

dismissed. He further contended that the suit in O.S.No.46 of 2009

filed by the petitioner seeking Declaration and consequential relief

with respect to the suit schedule property was dismissed. He also

contended that there are no reasonable and valid grounds to

entertain the said petition and the same is devoid of merit and

sought for dismissal.

6. Having perused the orders passed by the learned Senior Civil

Judge, Chirala in I.A.No.513 of 2018 and also the Judgments

before the Courts below, this Court has no hesitation to come to a

conclusion that the 2nd respondent got filed the present petition

through the petitioner herein, who is none other than his

daughter. With the same version, he failed in his attempts in all

the three Courts. Further, the suit in O.S.46 of 2009 filed by the

petitioner was also dismissed on merits and the appeal filed

against the said suit is pending. As such, there are no valid

grounds warranting interference of this Court with the impugned

order.

7. In that view of the matter, the Civil Revision Petition is

dismissed as devoid of any merit and the order, dated 11.2.2020

passed in I.A.No.513 of 2018 in I.A.No.38 of 2013 in O.S.No.84 of

2004 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Chirala,

Pakasam District, is hereby confirmed. There is no order as to

costs.

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall

stand closed.

_______________________ K. SURESH REDDY, J 4th Februray,2021.

RPD.

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURESH REDDY

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.869 of 2020

Dated : 04.02.2021

RPD.