SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(SC) 252

MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, ANIL R.DAVE
Prema – Appellant
Versus
Deva Rao – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Madhusmita Boara and Balaji Srinivasan, Advs.
Sampat Anand Shetty and Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Advs.

JUDGMENT

Anil R. Dave, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. Being aggrieved by the common judgment delivered by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore on 6th December, 2007 in RFA No. 1067/2006 and RFA No. 1068/2006, these appeals have been filed by the original Plaintiff and Defendant No. 3.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the litigation have been referred to as arrayed before the trial court.

4. The Plaintiff (Appellant No. 1 herein) is a sister of Defendant No. 4 who filed a suit claiming her right to the extent of 1/6th share in the properties described in Schedule-A to the plaint. The case of the Plaintiff before the trial court was that her father, Appuraya was an absolute owner of the suit property and, therefore, the Plaintiff had a right in the said property. According to her, after the death of her father Appuraya, Defendant No. 4, brother of the Plaintiff was in occupation of the suit property but as the suit property was an absolute property of her father, she too had a share in the property. Moreover, Defendant No. 4 had also executed a writing to the effect that he would give 1/6th share in the suit property to the Plaintiff. Inspite of the above fact, as no part of th












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top