THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH SECOND APPEAL No.918 of 2010 JUDGMENT: The minor son of the 4th defendant filed the suit in O.S.No.187 of 1998 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur through his mother for partition of the suit schedule property into 28 equal shares and to allot four such shares to him on the ground that the suit schedule property is a co-parcenory property, but not the personal property of the 4th defendant. The trial judge held that the suit schedule property is not a co- parcenory property, that defendants 2 to 4 got the suit schedule property by virtue of a will executed by their grand father and in fact, the properties bequeathed under the will were the personal properties fallen to the share of their grand father after dividing the other co-parcenory properties and accordingly, dismissed the suit. Aggrieved thereby, the plaintiff preferred A.S.No.13 of 2007 on the file of the District Judge (FTC), Guntur. The lower appellate court, vide its judgment and decree, dated 17-03-2010 dismissed the appeal confirming the judgment of the trial court. Aggrieved thereby, the plaintiff filed this Second Appeal. I have perused the judgments passed by the trial court as well as the lower appellate court. I am of the opinion that the trial court, after hearing both sides and after considering the entire material available on record, rightly dismissed 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