Heard Sri K.S.Gopala Krishnan vs Unknown
2021 Latest Caselaw 3366 AP

                   HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AT AMARAVATI


MAIN CASE NO.: S.A.No.235 of 2019
                                       PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl.      Date                                           ORDER                                      OFFICE
No.                                                                                                 NOTE
9.    06.09.2021   MVR,J                                                                           Tr. to I-
                                              I.A.No.1 of 2019                                     O folder
                                                                                                    before
                         Heard.                                                                    correcti
                                                                                                    ons if
                      Upon considering the reasons assigned in the affidavit                         any.
                                                                                                   Pl.verify
                   filed in support of this petition that make out sufficient                          .

                   cause, the delay of 89 days in filing the appeal memo is

                   condoned.

                     Accordingly, this petition is allowed.

                                                                                       ______
                                                                                       MVR,J
                                            S.A.No.235 of 2019
                      Heard Sri K.S.Gopala Krishnan, learned counsel for the

                   appellants and Sri N.Ranga Reddy, learned counsel for the

                   respondents.

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 lower appellate court failed to apply Sections 6 and 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 in proper perspective and granting the decree for partition of the suit schedule properties is sustainable in law?

2. Whether the lower appellate court failed to appreciate the principle of non-joinder of necessary party to the suit?

3. Whether the lower appellate court went wrong in decreeing the suit of the respondent/plaintiff without proper reasons?

Issue notice to the respondents. List the matter during the second week of November, 2021.

______ MVR,J

Pab