Partly allowed

K.P.Ranganna, v. Kuruva Thimmappa

Telangana HC16 Oct 2012CRP/2765/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a civil revision petition regising the framing of issues in a partition suit. It directed the lower court to re-consider and re-frame specific issues to align with the pleadings and the burden of proof under Order XIV CPC.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition dismissed by modifying the impugned order; trial court directed to re-frame issues Nos. 2 and 3; miscellaneous applications dismissed; no order as to costs.

K.P.Ranganna, Vs Kuruva Thimmappa — Partition | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR

¶2

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2765 OF 2012

¶3

Dt:- 17.10.2012

¶4

Between:-

¶5

K.P.Ranganna and others

¶6

… Petitioners and

¶7

Kuruva Thimmappa

¶8

… Respondent

¶9

This Court made the following:-

¶10

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR

¶11

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2765 OF 2012

¶12

ORDER: -

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

Since a very short issue arises for consideration, the revision itself is being disposed of with consent of both the parties.

¶15

Respondent filed a suit for partition in which the trial court framed the issues after examining the pleadings. But it, however, appears that the issues framed in the suit are in the negative form. Petitioner/defendant, therefore, sought re-casting of issue Nos.2 and 3 in particular, as follows:-

¶16

“I.Recast the Issue No.2

¶17

Issue No.2 Whether the B.C.D and E schedule properties are the joint Hindu family properties?

¶18

II. Recast the issue No.3

¶19

Issue No.3 whether the Court Fees paid under Section 34 (2) Suits Valuation Act is correct?”

¶20

On the said application, though the respondent/plaintiff did not file any counter, the court below dismissed the application on 19.06.2012 on the ground that the issues are already framed fixing the

¶21

burden on the defendant. Hence, the petition is dismissed.

¶22

Learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff fairly states that both sides have filed their pleadings and have opened the trial and are fully conscious of the respective pleas taken by them and the issues no doubt are framed in the negative form. Keeping in view the burden expected to be discharged by the respective parties, with reference to their pleadings, the proposed amended issues as sought to be framed by the petitioner/defendant would not cause any prejudice to any of the parties.

¶23

In view of the said fair statement of the learned counsel for the respondent, therefore, the Civil Revision Petition can be disposed of directing the lower court to re-consider framing of the issues as proposed by the petitioner in I.A.No.693 of 2012 so far as issue Nos.2 and 3 are concerned, as that will correctly reflect the stand of the parties in the pleadings. Even otherwise under Order XIV CPC it is for the trial court to re-caste or re-frame the issues at any time before determining the suit.

¶24

The Civil Revision Petition is, accordingly, disposed of by modifying the impugned order so as to enable the trial court to modify the issues appropriately and proceed with the trial of the suit and dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible. The miscellaneous applications, if any, stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶25

____________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J

¶26

17.10.2012 lmv

¶27

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR

¶28

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2765 OF 2012

¶29

16.10.2012

¶30

lmv

K.P.Ranganna, v. Kuruva Thimmappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.P.Ranganna, v. Kuruva Thimmappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G. Janardhana Goud, (died) per LRs Vs The District Collector

Bolli Bixapathi, Vs Sangisetti Ramadevi

Smt. Sarala Agrawal Vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Kesidi Madhusudhan Redy , Kesiredy Madhusudhan Reddy Vs Bollam Balakrishna

A.Jagadamba Vs M.Jayachandra Reddy

Jajula Lakshmi Vs Jajula Ratnamala