N.V. Ramana JUDGMENT
N.V. Ramana, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This Appeal has been preferred aggrieved by the orders passed by the High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh in CRP No. 3419 of 2013, dt. 27/12/2013 wherein and whereby the learned Judge has dismissed the Revision Petition preferred by the Appellants/Defendant Nos. 1 & 2 by confirming the orders passed in O.S. No. 10 of 2004, dt. 08/07/2013 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Anakapalle.
3. The brief facts which are necessary for adjudicating the dispute involved in the present appeal, in nutshell, are as follows.
4. The 1st Respondent/Plaintiff filed O.S. No. 10 of 2004 on the file of Senior Civil Judge Court, Anakapalle against the Appellants and others for the relief of partition claiming 1/4th share in Item No. 1, 1/2 share in Item No. 2 of the suit schedule properties.
5. It is the specific case of the 1st Respondent/Plaintiff that one Jaggayya, who is the foster father of the Plaintiff, had acquired certain properties during his life time and executed a Registered Will dt. 22/05/1964 in a sound and disposing state of mind bequeathing his immovable properties in favour of the Plaintiff/Respondent and 1st Defendant/Appellant No. 1 by giving life estate in favour of his wife Mahalakshmamma, and the said Mahalakshmamma died on 20/05/2001, as such Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 and the Defendant Nos. 1 & 2/Appellants became entitled to the plaint Schedule properties in equal shares. On his demand, when the Defendants failed to partition the properties by giving him his legitimate right, he has approached the Court by filling the above suit.
6. The Appellants herein (Defendant Nos. 1 & 2) resisting the plea of the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 filed the written statement that Appellant No. 1 being the sister's daughter of Mahalakshamma and the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 who is the sister's son of late Jaggayya were treated as foster son and daughter as Jaggayya had no issues. In the year 1969 properties were partitioned between the parties. The Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1, in spite of having his share in the properties, taking advantage of Appellant No. 1's innocence and helplessness, has taken other properties which are not allotted to him, having no other go she (Appellant No. 1) kept quiet. According to the Defendants/Appellants, after the partition they have been enjoying the properties fell to their respective shares. It is their further case that on 05-6-1975 Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 and the first Defendant/Appellant No. 1 got executed the Deed of Memorandum of earlier partition. Both the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 and the 1st Defendant/Appellant No. 1 were given pattadar passbooks and title deeds in respect of properties fell to their share and in fact, the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 has alienated some of his properties. Mahalakshsamma in a sound and disposing state of mind executed a Registered Will dated 27/03/1999 bequeathing all the properties in favour of 1st Defendant/Appellant No. 1. Further, Mahalkshamma has given away her life estate in favour of Appellant No. 1/Defendant No. 1 and the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1. Hence, it is pleaded that as properties were already partitioned in the year 1969, the question of again partitioning the properties does not arise and sought for dismissal of the Suit.
7. The A........