THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH SECOND APPEAL No.976 of 2010 JUDGMENT: The appellant is the defendant in the suit in O.S.No.2328 of 2004 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur, filed by the respondent herein for partition of the plaint schedule property into two equal shares and to allot one such share to the plaintiff with separate possession. It is the case of the plaintiff that one Gunja Chinnappa had got a wife by name Polamma and two children Sai Babu and defendant herein. Plaintiff is the son of the said Sai Babu. After the death of Gunja Chinnappa, Polamma married one Challa Krishnamma. The suit schedule property belongs to Challa Krishnamma, who gifted the same to the plaintiff’s grand mother Polamma under a registered gift deed, dated 30-03-1979. Thereafter, Polamma died intestate on 21-05-1999. The plaintiff’s father died on 10-04-1994. The said Polamma had no issues through her 2nd husband Challa Krishnamma. The plaintiff is the only legal heir of Saibabu, who died intestate. The plaintiff and the defendant are in possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property. Subsequently, the dispute arose between the plaintiff and the defendant and that the defendant had been proclaiming that she would not allow the plaintiff to have his half share in the plaint schedule property. Therefore, he filed the present suit. It is the case of the defendant that the plaintiff is her brother’s son. The plaintiff and the defendant are not in joint possession of the suit schedule property. The plaintiff has neither title nor possession over the suit schedule property and, therefore, he cannot claim half share in the suit schedule property. The trial court, after hearing both sides and after considering the material available on record, decreed the suit vide judgment and decree, dated 08-04-2008. Aggrieved thereby, the defendant filed A.S.No.128 of 2008 on the file of the V Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Guntur. The lower appellate court, vide its judgment and decree, dated 16-06-2010, dismissed the appeal confirming the judgment of the trial court. Aggrieved thereby, the defendant filed this Second Appeal. The only question raised by the appellant is that under Section 15(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, the children born through the first husband are not entitled to claim intestate succession in the property got through the second husband. Section 15(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act does not differentiate whether the children are born to the first husband or to the second husband. Admittedly, the defendant and the father of the plaintiff are born to the said Polamma. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the trial court, after hearing both sides and after considering the entire material available on record, rightly decreed the suit. Further, the lower appellate court, after reappraisal of the entire oral and documentary evidence, rightly dismissed the appeal confirming the judgment and decree of the trial court. In view of the concurrent findings recorded by both the courts below, I do not see any question of law, much less substantial question of law that arises for consideration in the Second Appeal. Accordingly, the Second Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 14-10-2011 Prv