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

1989 Supreme(Kar) 14

M.RAMAKRISHNA RAO, M.P.CHANDRAKANTARAJ
THIMMARAJU – Appellant
Versus
PUTTAKENCHAMMA – Respondent


Advocates:
K.M.Shankaralingappa, L.SRINIVASA REDDY, M.S.BHUJANGA RAO

CHANDRAKANTARAJ URS, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal directed against the judgment and decree dated 31-7-1987 of the XII Additional City Civil Judge of bangalore, passed in 0 S. No. 858 of 1980 on his file coming up for admission after notice, is disposed of by the following judgment.

( 2 ) THE brief facts necessary to be stated for a just disposal of this case are as follows:- one Puttakenchamma was the daughter of one Malavalli Chandagiriyappa. Chandagiriyappa and his brother malavalli Kamaiah constituted a undivided hindu joint family. Chandagiriyappa died some time in the year 1975 leaving behind him the the plaintiff, M. C. Thimmaraju and children of his pre-deceased son M C. Narayappa who were arrayed as defendants in the aforementioned original suit. She claimed partition of the suit schedule properties, moveables and immoveables, and possession by metes and bounds particularly of a dwelling house situated on Kilari Road, item No. 1 of plaint 'a' schedule property in which she claimed to be residing. The suit was resisted by the defendants inter alia on the ground that she was not entitled to any share and that she could not maintain a suit for partition not being a coparcener and in a









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