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

2000 Supreme(Kar) 538

H.N.TILHARI
A. K. LAXMANAGOUDA – Appellant
Versus
A. K. JAYARAM – Respondent


Advocates:
C.N.KAMATH, SAMPATH ANAND SHETTY

H. N. TILHARI, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Pro-cedure has arisen from the judgment and decree 20-1-1997 in O. S. No. 87/93 whereby the trial Court (Civil Judge, Chikmagalur) has dismissed the plaintiff/appellant's suit for decree for declaration that after the life time of the 2nd defendant, the plaintiff becomes the absolute owner of the schedule property and for decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants/respondents from alienating the suit schedule property in any manner and from cutting and removing the timber or shade trees standing in the schedule property.

( 2 ) THE brief facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are that Kenchegowda, his two sons A. K. Lakshmana Gowda and A. K. Jayaram as well as Smt. S. Yeshodamma, wife of Kenchegowda and mother of the plaintiff/appellant and defendant/respondent No. 1 constituted a joint family. That according to the plaintiff's case, on 28-3-1980, with the consent of all the members, like Kenche Gowda effected a partition vide partition deed executed and registered on 28-3-1980 and the property was divided into three shares, one share of the property namely the schedule property was retain














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