High CourtsSingle Bench(2025) 01 AP CK 1529

Allaboyina Rambabu vs Allaboyina Mangamma And Others

Andhra Pradesh High Court, Amaravati · Decided on 3 January 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Nyapathy Vijay, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Revision Petition No: 1576 Of 2023

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 344 words

Nyapathy Vijay, J

1.

The present civil revision petition is filed questioning the order dated 13.09.2022 in I.A.No.1369 of 2017 in O.S.No.324 of 2015 passed by the III Additional Junior Civil Judge (Excise), Vizianagaram.

2.

Petitioner is the plaintiff. Suit was filed for partition of plain schedule properties and for consequential reliefs. As per the plaint, one Allaboyana Narsimhulu had five sons namely (1) Allaboyana Appanna (2) Allaboyana Bangarayya (3) Allaboyana Gangulu (4) Allaboyana Rambabu and (5) Allaboyana Gowri @ Sanyasi and one daughter by name Allu Narasamma. The eldest son Allaboyana Appanna died leaving his wife, children and his mother as class 1 heirs. Thereafter, the father Allaboyana Narsimhulu died leaving behind the plaintiff and defendant Nos.1 to 6 as class 1 heirs.

3.

As the properties mentioned in the plaint schedule are joint family properties, the suit was filed for partition by the Petitioner i.e. fourth son of Allaboyana Narsimhulu. The Defendant No. 1 is the wife of the eldest brother i.e. late Allaboyana Appanna. As the daughter of defendant No.1 was not arrayed as one of the parties to the suit, an application was filed by the Petitioner to bring her on record since she also has an interest in the joint family property as Class 1 heir of the late Allaboyana Appanna.

4.

The trial Court dismissed the said application on the ground that subsequent alienees are not necessary parties to the suit. Hence, the present revision petition is filed.

4.

Heard Sri G.Sai Narayana Rao, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Sri K.Jyothi Prasad, learned counsel for the respondents.

5.

The reasoning given by the trial Court is curious as the proposed defendant No.1 is daughter of late Allaboyana Appanna and defendant No.1 and she has direct interest if the property is declared to be a joint family property.

6.

The order of the trial Court dated 13.09.2022 is erroneous and the same is set aside.

7.

The civil revision petition is therefore allowed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.