THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH SECOND APPEAL NO. 1049 OF 2010 DT. 14.10.2011 Between: Mannava Jayasree and ors … Petitioners And Nadimpalli Sambasiva Rao and ors … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri N Srihari Counsel for respondent: The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH SECOND APPEAL NO. 1049 OF 2010 JUDGMENT : (Per Sri Justice V Eswaraiah) The appellants are plaintiffs, who filed the present Second Appeal, questioning the judgment and decree passed in A.S. No. 162 of 2009 dated 16.2.2010 passed by the XI Additional District and Sessions Judge, (FTC), Guntur at Tenali in confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 40 of 2008 dated 1.12.2008 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Repalli dismissing the suit. The appellants-plaintiffs filed a suit in O.S. No. 40 of 2008 against the defendants for partition of suit schedule properties into seven equal shares by meats and bounds and to allot one such share to each of them and put them in possession and for mean profits on the ground that they are daughters and defendants/respondents herein are the sons of late Nadimpalli Papa Raju and late Nadimpalli Vimala Devi. That the late Nadimpalli Papa Raju and defendants 1 to 3 got divided the joint family properties under a registered partition deed dated 19.9.1957 in Ex.B.1. The late Nadimpalli Papa Raju executed a registered will dated 26.9.1985 in Ex.A.1 whereunder the properties fell to his share were bequeathed i.e., the suit schedule “A” and “B” properties to his wife Nadimpalli Vimala Devi. The said Nadimpalli Vimala Devi, purchased the suit schedule “C” property from the defendants 1 to 4 for a valid consideration of Rs.30,000/- with her Sridana on 25.3.1979 and has been in possession of said property till her death. Heard the learned counsel for appellants and perused the judgments of the Courts below. There is no doubt with regard to the partition of the properties vide Ex.B1 dated 19.9.1957 whereunder the properties were divided among the father and his three sons and thereafter he executed a will dated 26.9.1985 giving life estate in favour of his wife and after her life to his sons i.e., defendants 1 to 4 with absolute rights. Both the Courts below on consideration of the matter concurrently held that the plaintiff failed to establish that there exists any undivided ancestral property and rightly rejected the claim of the plaintiffs. The findings arrived by the Courts below, does not warrant any interference of this Court. There is no substantial question of law that arises for consideration in the present Second Appeal and accordingly the same is hereby dismissed. No orders as to the costs. _____________ V ESWARAIAH,J DATE: 14.10.2011 TVK THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH SECOND APPEAL NO. 1049 OF 2010 DT. 14.10.2011