Judgment :-

Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, J.

This appeal has been preferred by defendant No.3 against the judgment dated 20th January, 2003 passed by the High Court of Karnataka in R.F.A. No.319 of 1998. By the impugned judgment and decree the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and decree of trial court and decreed the suit declaring that defendant Nos.1,2,3 and 4 are entitled to 11/50th share each and the plaintiff, defendant Nos.5,6,7,8 and 9 are entitled to 1/50th share each in the suit schedule properties.

2. The facts of the case are as follows:

The plaintiff-respondent No.4 filed a suit for partition and separate possession of 1/10th share in the suit schedule properties by metes and bounds and also sought for an enquiry under Order 20 Rule 12 C.P.C. to ascertain the mesne profits. She is the second daughter of late Shri Kunnaiah whereas defendant Nos.1,2,3 and 4, including the appellant herein are the sons and defendant Nos.5,6,7 and 8 are the daughters of late Shri Kunnaiah. Defendant No.9 is the son of the first daughter of late Shri Kunnaiah.

3. Plaintiff claimed that the suit schedule properties are self-acquired properties of late Shri Kunnaiah and, theref