Partition suit in high court of ap
Bantaram ashok kumar
(Querist) 07 March 2015
This query is : Resolved
20 acres of land at Puppalaguda village and another 22 acres of land was at Rudraram village right from 1938 on my grand father's(V.Rao) name purchased by his father one Chandrappa. V.Rao has one brother J.Rao.Their father Chandrappa died in 1943. V.Rao has sold 22 acres of land in 1952 for family needs. Another 20 acres land was existing on his name till his death in 1970. His brother, J.Rao got the above 20 acres land of Puppalaguda village, mutated in his name in 1974 after the deatch of V.Rao, declaring that his elder brother, V.Rao and his wife also died and he is issueless. Later when the daughters of V.Rao came to know filed a partition suit in Dist.court and wherein the Defendant, J.Rao adduced evidence with his own sister S.Amma that due to some reasons partition took place in 1942 when their father Chandrappa was alive and V.Rao was around 23 yrs old and defendant (J.Rao) was only 4 yrs old and the DW2 (S.Amma) was around 14 yrs old. Defendants informed the court that this partition took place in 1942 in front of defendants presence and also in presence of her husband, her maternal uncle and one neighbour Hakeem V.B. Only S.Amma was examined and at the time of evidence in dist. court in 1993, her husband and maternal uncle too died and only Hakeem V.B. was alive but he was not examined. Based on her only evidence, the lower court has decreed in their favour saying that mere entries in revenue records does not establish right ownership and according to DW1 (J.Rao) and DW2 S.Amma partition took place in 1942 and in some parts of Telangana it is not uncommon to continue the revenue records to continue and DW1 in his written statements and in examinations informed that the land he got mutated on to his name has fallen to his share and hence he got it mutated in his name. When he was questioned about the recitals - that his brother, V.Rao died and his wife died and he is issueless and he (J.Rao - DW1) is only the legal heir and therefore the land has to be mutated in his name. Strangely lower court observed that the DW1 is aware of the mistake and due to ignorance has used those recitals, had he knew properly he would have used proper recitals. Based on these assumptions the lower court has decreed in defendants favour. Appealed in HC of AP and now for final arguments. I request you to kindly guide in the matter with regard to the earlier judgements passed in such cases. A.Kumar, Hyderabad
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 07 March 2015
search google for citations.
Bantaram ashok kumar
(Querist) 07 March 2015
Sir i want your valuable opinion about my partition suit.
H.M.Patnaik
(Expert) 07 March 2015
Agree with Mr. Nanda.
Being a holder of such a large patch of land , you are in a position to afford good legal counsel locally to handle the matter.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 08 March 2015
trial court has already decreed suit in defendant favour . your appeal is placed for final arguments . your lawyer will search for citations . when you are paying him legal fees let him work hard for his brief
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 08 March 2015
For Paid Phone legal Consultation Press CLICK TO TALK.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 08 March 2015
reply on your lawyer. IF YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED THEN ENGAGE ANOTHER LAWYER.
Bantaram ashok kumar
(Querist) 08 March 2015
Strange to find that no expert could give his legal stand or opinion. ..which was not expected from such an expert legal firm
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 11 March 2015
The experts are not your paid servants to oblige you. The stand taken by experts is to not to provide the citations. You were told to take your own lawyer into confidence since you have paid him the fee, you may do it or if you dont have faith in him, you may change the lawyer. Your expectation from the experts here is your own idea and nobody asked you to do it. If the experts reply is strange it appears you have seen or come across actual strange things in your life.
