TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 1389X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered sale deed dated 12.12.1978 for a consideration of ₹ 40,000/-. It was further alleged that they also purchased the remaining one half vide another sale deed dated 10.4.1979 for a further sum of ₹ 40,000/-. The grand-father of the appellant Dhondapati Narayana Reddy who had undivided one-third share in the said property executed a registered Will dated 20.8.1994 bequeathing his entire estate to the plaintiff- appellant. After the death of his grand-father, the plaintiff and his brothers became absolute owners of one-third undivided share in the property and along with their father's one-third share they became owners of two-third undivided share in the scheduled property. It is alleged that in his written statement defend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tement vide its order dated 16.10.2000. Aggrieved by the order of the trial court, the defendant-appellant filed CRP No.4692 of 2000 in the High Court which was dismissed vide the order impugned in the appeal. Both the revisions have been disposed of by the High Court vide a common order dated 13.3.2001. Learned counsel appearing for the parties have prayed for setting aside the orders impugned in these appeals with prayer for allowing the petition of their respective clients and dismissing the application of the contesting respondents. Rules governing pleadings and leading of evidence have been incorporated to advance the interests of justice and to avoid multiplicity of litigation. If the claim of plaintiff Dondapati Narayana Red ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an opportunity to lead additional evidence to prove its validity. The High Court appears to have adopted a very rigid and technical approach in rejecting the prayer of the plaintiff to lead additional evidence to prove testamentary succession by producing registered Will dated 20.8.1994 executed by Donapati Tirumala Ramareddy. In view of what has been stated hereinabove, both the appeals are allowed by setting aside the impugned orders and by allowing the applications filed by the plaintiff and defendant NO.1. The trial court shall allow the defendant to amend the written statement and permit the plaintiff to adduce additional evidence to prove testamentary succession by producing registered Will dated 20.8.1994 as prayed for by him in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
