THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY C.R.P.No.390 of 2011 ORDER: The 1st respondent filed O.S.No.199 of 1999 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Adoni, for the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. The petitioners figured as defendants 5 and 6 in the suit. The trial Court passed a preliminary decree, allotting shares to various parties. A.S.No.35 of 2001 was filed in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, mainly on the ground that the shares of the parties have changed on account of the death of some of the parties, and other developments. The Appellate Authority allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the trial Court, for fresh consideration and disposal. After remand, the trial Court framed additional issues. One such issue, pertaining to the gift dated 23-05-2006, alleged to have been executed by the 4th defendant, who died during the pendency of the suit; was framed. The gift was in favour of defendant No.3, i.e. respondent No.4 herein. The petitioners filed I.A.No.1356 of 2010 with a prayer to strike off the additional issue, framed on 14-12-2010. The I.A was dismissed by the trial Court on 29-12-2010. Hence this C.R.P. Heard Sri J. Janaki Rami Reddy learned counsel for the petitioners. The trial of the suit is in progress, after it was remanded by the lower Appellate Court. It was filed for the relief of partition; and changes have taken place, as to the shares of the parties, during the pendency of the suit. It is not in dispute that the 4th defendant died. He is said to have executed gift deed in favour of defendant No.3. The petitioners herein claim to be the wife and daughter of the 4th defendant, whereas the 3rd defendant was his sister. The question as to whether the alleged gift deed has any impact upon the rights of the petitioners herein; is an important issue, that needs verification. It was in this context, that the trial Court framed the following issue: “Whether the Gift deed dt.23.5.06 executed by defendant No.4 during the pendency of the suit in favour of defendant No.3 is true, valid and binding on the defendants 5 and 6 ?” This Court is of the view that, if at all anybody, it is the petitioners herein, that would get benefit, on account of framing of an issue. On the other hand, in the absence of the issue, the property that would have otherwise fallen to the share of the deceased-4th defendant, would accrue to the 3rd defendant, i.e. respondent No.4 herein, by operation of gift deed. There are no merits in the C.R.P. It is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.11-02-2011. KO