Disposed

Mr.Alluri Prem Kumar v. Mr.Alluri Prabhakar

Telangana HC22 Mar 2022SA/1188/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court recorded a Memorandum of Compromise filed via interim application in a Second Appeal regarding partition disputes over residential property. Based on the settlement, the appeal was disposed of without costs, and the lower court judgments were modified.

What did the court decide?

The Second Appeal disposed of by recording the Memorandum of Compromise; the impugned judgment and decree modified in terms thereof.

Mr.Alluri Prem Kumar Vs Mr.Alluri Prabhakar — Partition | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF^IVARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

¶5

SECON D APPEAL NO:1188 OF 2004

¶6

Appeal Under Section 100 of CPC^{against the Judgment and Decree dated} 15.07.2004 made in A.S.No.70 of 2001 on the^{file of the Court of the lV Additional} District Judge, Warangal.

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mr.Alluri Prem Kumar, S/o.Late^{Prasangi, aged 60 years,Occ: Retd} Employee R/o.H.No.2-7-5, Nakkalagutta,^Hanamkonda.

¶9

...APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT

¶10

AND

¶11

1 Mr.Atluri Prabhakar, S/o.Late^{Prasangi, aged68 years, Occ: RetiredGovt.} Teacher, R/o.H.No,2-7-5, Nakkalagutta,^{Hanamkond.(died per LRs2 to 5)}

¶12

("Alluri" the word is substituted as Atluri is amended as^per Court Order dated 16 03.2022 in l.A.No.¹ /2020)

¶13

2 Smt. Atluri Sarala Subhashini,^{D/o. Late Atluri Prabhakar,aged 53 years, Occ} Household, RJo. H.No.5-27-55, Gajula^{Ramaram, Roda l\ilistryNagar, Subhas} Chandra Bose Nagar, Qutubullapur Mandal,^{RangaReddy District.}

¶14

3 Atluri Pramod Kumar Chowdary, S/o.^{Late Atluri Prabhakar, aged 50 years,} Occ: Govt. Employee, R/o Plot No.326,^{Chandragiri, East Neredmet,} Safilguda, Secunderabad.^(died)

¶15

4 Atluri V. Praveen Kumar, S/o Late Atluri^{Prabhakar,aged 56 years, Occ:} Business, R/o H.No.12-7-131lA, New^{[/ettuguda,Secunderabad.]}

¶16

5 Atluri Preetham Kumar, S/o. Late^{AtluriPrabhakar,aged 55 years, Occ:} Business, R/o Plot No.177, Sripuram^{Colony, l/alakpet,Hyderabad}

¶17

(RR2 to 5 are brought on record as LRs of the Sole Respondent vide^C.O. dated 08.09.201O in ClVP.No 397l2O10)

¶18

(GPA lVlr. V. Praveen Kumar, S/o. Late Atluri Prabhakar, aged.44^years' bcc:Business, R/.o H.No.12-7-131lA,^{NewN,4ettuguda,Secunderabadis} permitted to represent the case as GPA on behalf of Respondent^Nos.6, 7 & 9 as per C.O, dated 16.03.2022in1.A.No.112022)

¶19

6 A. Swetha Devi, D/o Atluri Pramod^{Kumar Chowdary,aged 23 years,}

¶20

7 A. Spandana Devi, D/o Atluri Pramod Kumar^{Chowdary, aged 21 yeats,}

¶21

A. Pratheesht Kumar Chowdary, S/o Atluri Pramod Kumar Chowdary, aged 1B years, Occ: Student

¶22

A. Soumya Devi, D/o. Atluri Pramod Kumar Chowdary, aged 15^years, Student, being minor rep. by her^guardian A. Swetha Devi (R6)

¶23

(All are Rr/o. H.No.27-16122134, SN 34/A, Siddartha Nagar, Sitaram Nagar, Krupa Complex, Safilguda, Hyderabad.

¶24

(RR 6 to 6 are brought on record as LRs of deceased R3 vide C.O. dated 30.08.201 1 in SAMP.No.'1 538i201 0)

¶25

...RESPONDENTS

¶26

lA NO: 2 OF 2022

¶27

Petition under Order 23 Rule 3 R/w Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pass decree and Judgment in SA No.1188 of 2004 in terms of Memorandum of Compromise filed herewith.

¶28

Counsel For The Appellant: Sri J. Prabhakar for Smt. Kanumuri Kalyani

¶29

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 5: Sri K. Ravindranath

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 to 9: Sri A. Gopala Krishnamacharyulu

¶31

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶32

HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT P.SREE SUDHA

¶33

S.A.No.1188 of 2OO4

¶34

JUDGMENT;

¶35

I.ANo.2 of 2022 is filed to record compromise as per the Mernorandum of Compromise. -

¶36

It is reprcsented that respondenr Nos.1 and 3 died and their' LRs were brought on record and respondent Nos.2 and 8 also died and their LRs were not brought on record.

¶37

Both the leamed counsel and the pafiies are present before this. C-ourt. Both the panies srated rhat they have entered into comprornise and the terms and conditions are rccorded in the Memorandr,rm of C-ompr-omise, which is filed along udth the I.A

¶38

In view of the same, I.ANo.2 of 2022 is ordered and the Memorandum of Compromise is taken on record and the Second Appeal is disposed of in terms of the Memorandum of Understanding. No order as to costs.

¶39

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

¶40

SD/.K.SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY' &

¶41

SECTION OFFICER

¶42

To, 1. The lV Additional District Judge at Warangal. (with records) 2. The Principal Senior Civil Judge at Warangal. 3. One CC to Sri J, Prabhakar, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Smt. K Kalyani, Advocate IOPUC]

¶43

One CC to Sri K Ravindra Nath, Advocate IOPUC] 6. One CC to Sri A. Gopala Krishnamacharyulu, Advocate [OPUC]

¶44

Two CD Copies

¶45

B. One Spare Copy

¶46

(Along with copy of Memorandum of Compromise) ,:lrr nr.ly'AY

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2210312022

JUDGMENT

SA.No.1188 of 2004

',\ ti\ E oF ).{
+ .'<br>9' c[.:t '
o
l4
I t:-
a-.
),'lr

¶52

DISPOSING OF THE S.A.

¶53

IN TERMS OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITHOUT COSTS

¶54

¶55

¶56

MEMORANDUM OF COMPROMISE

¶57

The appellant herein is the defendant in the suit in O.S.No.39/1993 before the Prl.senior Civil Judge, Warangal and the respondent herein is the plaintiff, The respondent flled the above suit against the appellant herein for passing preliminary decree for partition of the suit house into two equal shares by appointing a Commissioner and to allot one such share to him by giving separate possession. The Hon'ble Court below dismissed the suit with costs on 19.03.2001.

¶58

The respondent herein preferred A.S.No.7012001 before the IV Addl.Judge, Warangal against the Judgment and Decree dt.19.03.2001 in O.S.No.39/1993. The appellate court allowed the appeal on 15.07.2004 setting aside the

¶59

impugned Judgment di ng the partition of the suit

¶60

0 U

¶61

shares and^{to allot in the said} schedule^{house into two}

¶62

proportion'

¶63

1. The^{appellant herein preferred thepresent} S.A.No.11BB/2004^{before this Hon'bleCouft and thesame} Wasadmittedandaninterimstayofallfurtherproceedings decree^{and Judgment,}

¶64

in^{pursuanceof the Preliminary} dt.15.07.2001^{in A'S'No'70/2004on the file of} IV Addl.District^{ludge,Warangalpending disposal of the} S.A'No.11BB/2004^{was granted on 07'10'2004 and thesame} is^{pending'The appellant has beenin possession of the Sujt} Schedule^{Propertytill todaYsince his bitth'}

¶65

I
,

¶66

¶67

1. The^{sole respondentin this appeal died on 07'11 2008} leaving^{behind him his legal heirs i'e' respondents2 to 5} herein'^{SubsequentlythisHon'ble Courtwas pleasedto order} notice^{in the LR petitioni'e' SAMPINo'397/2010'The}

¶68

respondents^{2 to5 made theirappea rance through their}

¶69

.L_----,)
) ,l)
o
o
-l r /f, )n
| (,//1.-t-,-.+' L,

¶70

¶71

¶72

counsel on 23.04.2010.^{SAMP. No.397/2010 was orderedon} 08.09.2010. During^{pendencyof this appeal, the respondent} No.2 and iespondent No.3 too died.^{The respondentNos'6} to 9 were brought on record as^{Legal Helrs of respondent} No.3. The respondent no.B also^{died during pendenryof} appeal and there are^no other^{legal heirs so far this estate is} concerned.' The wife of^{deceased respondentNo.Bre-} married after his death. The respondent^{Nos.6, 7 & 9, who} are sisters of respondent^{No,B are the only legal heirs of} deceased respondent^{No.8 so far as the schedule mentioned} propedry is concerned.

¶73

The 3'd respondent^{i.e Atluri Pramod Kumar ChowdaryS/o} Late Atluri Prabhakar entered^{into compromisealong with} other respondents and died on^{12.05.2010leaving behind} him his legal heirs the respondent^{No. 6 to 9. Smt.A. Devaki} Chowdary, Wo Late^{PramodKumarChowdary died on} 13 .06.2010. the Hon'ble^Co WAS pleased order notice in

¶74

0
!r
( ,tt 1kh^^-'
0

¶75

¶76

LR petition i.e. SAMP No. 1538/2010 on 08.09.10 to bring the above said respondents 6 to 9 on record. The^proposed respondents 6 to 9 made their appearance through their counsel on 28.09.2010. The respondents 6 to t have also accepted for the compromise.

¶77

As per the advise and mediation through elders, the pafties

¶78

have come to an amicable settlement regarding the subject matter or the appeal herein/suit schedule property i.e. House No. 2-7-5 (old) 2-6-9a (new) to the extent of 480 Sq.yards

¶79

situated at Circuit House Road, Nakkalagutta, Hanamakonda with the following boundaries :

¶80

East:30'Road West : House of Mallela David North: Rutherford Baptist Church South: Open land belongs to others

¶81

dnd another adjacent plot admeasuring 138.82

¶82

Sq.yards equivalent to 116.06 Sq.mtrs in Sy.No. 434 & 435

¶83

(old), 209 & 211 (new) of Waddepally Revenue Village (v),

I
t

1 v

House^Road, Ruthafford Housing ColonY,^Circuit Hanmakonda^{Mandal with} the limits of Nakkalagutta, Warangal, Municipal^{Corporation,abutting to sult schedule} house, with the^{following boundaries}

¶90

East : House of^GoPalReddY west : 20'^Road North: House of^Asheervadam southr H.No. 2-6-94^{(Suit schedule Property)}

¶91

However, the^{padies herein agreed and admit that the} said^{propertyis not availablefor partition' The property that} is available for^{partitionis mentionedin detail in schedule} annexed to^{this comPromise.}

¶92

TERMS OF COMPROMISE

¶93

A. The appellant^{herein and the respondentNos'4 to 7 & 9} have decided^{to settle the disputes amicablyand to partition} the above said^{propertyie., HouseNo 2-7-5 (old) 2-6-94} ' )) (new) to the extent to the extent extent^{of 480480} ards situated at Circuit^House 0 t .l^l.---- *rv '

¶94

' )) (new) to the extent to the extent extent^{of 480480} t((t -:: (-y!-: vy1:-_,--

¶95

¶96

Road, Nakkalagutta, Hanamakonda as per the advice of the elders in the ratio of 600/o for the appellant and 40% to respondent Nos.4 to 7 & 9.

¶97

B It is agreed by all the parties herein that the House No.2_7_5 (old) 2-6-94 (new) situated at Circuit House Road, Nakkalagutta, Hanamakonda (schedule mentioned property) will be divided into hvo parts in the ratio of 600/o to 400/o shares. A part of the property is under encroachment, upon ectual measuremenb, the area now available is 474 sq.yards.,

¶98

C The parties concluded that it is not possible to divide the property as per the above proportion, more particularly among the respondents out of their 40% share. The parties therefore decided to alienate / transfer rthe schedule mentioned property and then to share the sale proceeds in the proportion of 600/o e appellant and 40% to the ! L)

I
t,

.r.t-,

ti \ffi sql d

respondents. The share of respondents of 40olo shall be^paid l to the respondent No.4 viz., Atluri V.Praveen Kumar and respondent No.5 viz.,-sri A.Preetham Kumar, who shall distribute the amounts under^proper receipt to the other respondents. All the^parties herein have no objection for this arrangement.

¶107

The appellant herein is entitled to sell / alienate / transfer the schedule mentioned^property by executing / registering the document of transfer crn his behalf and also on behalf of others for which purpose the respondents herein shall execute and register the General Power of Attorney.

¶108

¶109

In case any of the party does not come for receiving the sale proceeds in terms of the above mentioned shares and/or does not come forward to execute and register the sale deed in favor of the^{prospective purchasers} the other party/padies

¶110

¶111

are entitled to get get such sale deed executed by Hon'ble by Hon'ble Hon'ble Court '..

¶112

a.) are entitled to get get such sale deed executed by Hon'ble by Hon'ble Hon'ble u L c) (u*' (b1 LYli ' J---

1 iI

of Prl. Senior Civil .Judge, Warangal upon deposit of his/her share to the credit of O.S.No.No.39 of 1993 on the flle of^prl. Senior Civil Judge, Warangal.

¶117

F The^judgment and decree dt.19.03.2001 in OS.No,39/1993 passed by the court of Prl.Senior Civil Judge, Warangal and judgment and decree dt.15.07.2004 in AS.No.7012001 passed by the court of iV Addl.District Judge, Warangal stands modified in terms of this compromise.

¶118

G. Each party to bear his / her own costs.

¶119

H. A decree be passed in SA.No.tlBB/2004 in terms of this

¶120

memorandum of compronrise.

¶121

SCIIEDULE

¶122

sing house with
sq.yards (now
o Nakkalagutta,
nt boundaries):
/n^ o
/ U t /-"^-
n-/J--- -W:
,/:-<br>d
(!f^"--*'

¶123

¶124

North: H.No.2-6-93 belonging to Late'Gopal Reddy
East: 30'Road
50utn: 12 ft., lane
West : House bearing No.2-6-95 belo to Ajay Kumar
Y n va APP
0
(au'
I
COUNSEL FOR PELLANT
RESPONDENT NO.4
PON DE NT No.5
PONDENT NO.6
(thru GP ie., Rpdt.No.4)
RESPOTOTrut No' 7
(thru lder ie., Rpdt.No.4)
N c\ (thru GPA RESPONDENT Holder ie., RPdt.No NO.4)9
<br>K K uj..r;-
COUNSEl roQ nPor.l,los .4 to 7 &9

Mr.Alluri Prem Kumar v. Mr.Alluri Prabhakar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Alluri Prem Kumar v. Mr.Alluri Prabhakar

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

Ameti Chandraiah Vs Ameti Naveen Kumar

The Branch Manager, Uiico. Ltd. Nizamabad Vs Roop Singh and Another

Ameti Chandraiah, s/o Late Veeraiah, Vs Ameti Naveen Kumar, s/o Chandraiah

United India Insurance Company Limited Vs Panganti Vijaya

National Insurance Company Limited Vs K. Maruthi , Babu

Jeripothula Papaiah Vs Syed Madar and Another