Sunita Charupalli, v. Edamadaka Bala Venkata Subbiah And 3 Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.09.2025 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Sunita Charupalli D/o. Edamadaka Bala Venkata Subbiah ... Applicant / Plaintiff Vs.
1.Edamadaka Bala Venkata Subbiah S/o. E. Pakkeeriah Chetty 2.Hanumayamma Edamadaka W/o. Edamadaka Bala Venkata Subbiah 3.Satish Kumar Edamadaka S/o. Edamadaka Bala Venkata Subbiah 4.Lakshmi Manasa Charupalli D/o. Sunita Charupalli ... Respondents / Defendants PRAYER: This application has been filed under Order XIV Rule 8, Sub Rule Page No.1 of 6
XI of High Court Original Side Rules read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Order VI Rule 17 of Civil Procedure Code read with Order II Rule 3 of Original Side Rules praying to direct the 1st respondent to disclose on oath all assets (including those that have been disposed of or dealt with in any manner) and to provide details of any sale thereof.
For Petitioner :
Mrs. Hema Srinivasan For Respondents:
R1 to R3 :
Mr. M. Gopalakrishnan R4 :
No appearance.
ORDER
This application has been filed to direct the 1st respondent to disclose on oath all assets (including those that have been disposed of or dealt with in any manner) and to provide details of any sale thereof.
2. According to the applicant, she has filed the main Suit for the relief Page No.2 of 6
of partition and declaration of settlement deeds as null and void. In fact, she already filed O.S. No.43 of 2023 before the II Additional District Judge, Proddattur challenging the partition deed No.18268/2021 dated 06.12.2021 as being null and void and the same is pending. In that Suit, she came to light that there were other HUF properties which had been illegally sold and the applicant upon discovering that there were other HUF properties, which they colluded to dispose off and thereby, she also filed an amendment application in respect of share over those properties. The respondents have not disclosed the other HUF assets and therefore, she has filed this application.
3. The respondents have stoutly denied and filed a detailed counter by denying the nature and character of the properties and the respondents have self acquired properties and there are no ancestral properties. Moreover, the applicant has not filed the Suit for partition of entire family properties and only she filed the Suit for partition between the Plaintiff and the 4th defendant Page No.3 of 6
in respect of the property settled by the 1st and 2nd defendants in favour of the Plaintiff and the 4th defendant. Therefore, the application is liable to be dismissed.
4. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
5. The application has been filed by the applicant to disclose on oath all assets (including those that have been disposed of or dealt with in any manner) and to provide details of any sale thereof. The main Suit is filed for partition over the particular property stating that it was settled by the 1 and 2 defendants in favour of the plaintiff and the 4th defendant and it has been filed to declare the settlement deeds as null and void in respect of the Suit property and thereafter, filed another application to amend the plaint pleadings and direction to include other properties. In the meantime, simultaneously filed this application.
Page No.4 of 6
6. When the applicant filed a Suit for partition, it is the duty of the applicant to find out all the joint family properties for partition and being the co-member of the joint family, it is her duty to disclose the facts to find out the properties and to seek proper remedy and she cannot compel the respondents to disclose the family properties, Even according to the respondents, there are no joint family properties. Therefore, this application has no merits and deserves to be dismissed.
7. In view of the above discussions, this application is dismissed. 18.09.2025 [2/2] mjs P.DHANABAL.,J mjs Page No.5 of 6
18.09.2025 [2/2] Page No.6 of 6