Kusumanchi Anitha vs Kusumanchi Parameswara Rao
2022 Latest Caselaw 1168 AP

                         HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH


MAIN CASE NO:       S.A.No.114 of 2022
                                  PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl.No.      Date                            ORDER                                  OFFICE NOTE



         04.03.2022 BSB, J

                        Heard       learned       counsel           for     the
                    appellant.
                        Perused the record.
                        The        Second        Appeal        is     against
                    concurrent findings disallowing suit for
                    declaration of title and permanent
                    injunction.
                        The        present       Second        Appeal         is
                    preferred on the following substantial
                    questions       of      law     raised           in     the
                    memorandum of grounds of appeal.
                       1. Whether the evidence adduced
                             by     the     plaintiff     is        satisfying
                             Section        63     of     the             Indian
                             Succession Act, 1925 and Section
                             68 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872
                             to     prove     Ex.A.1       Will           dated
                             26.04.1995.
                       2. Whether the propounder of the
                             Will under Ex.A.1 is proper and
                             necessary party when he disposed
                             of the properties under Exs.A.2
                             and A.3 gift deeds in favour of
                             the      plaintiff         and          virtually
                             plaintiff stepped into the shoes
                             of       the         propounder                 Sri
                             Jagadeeswara Rao
                       3. Whether the judgment of the
                             lower appellate Court is visuated
                             for not following the procedure
       under Order 41 Rule 31` CPC in
      as   much      as     no    points   for
      determination         is   framed    and
      answered by the lower appellate
      Court.


     In view of the same, it is a fit case
to admit the appeal.
       ADMIT.
       Learned       counsel       for     the
appellant is permitted to take out
personal   service     of    notice   to   the
respondents 1 and 3 through RPAD and

file proof thereof. R-2 is shown as dead even before the first appellate Court and also this Court.

Post on 31.03.2022.

_________________ B.S.BHANUMATHI,J PNV