The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Muslim Law in determining the devolution of property and the legal requirements for family settlement, gift, and mutation entries.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is filed against the judgment and decree passed in O. S. No. 100 of 1989 on the file of the learned Civil Judge, Jamakhandi.

( 2 ) DEFENDANTS 1 to 5 and 8 to 10 in the suit are the appellants. The plaintiff and defendants 6 and 7 are respondents in the appeal. Appellants 1 to 3 are the brothers of the first and fourth respondents. The 5th appellant is the aunt of the first respondent and appellants 1 to 3. Respondents 2 and 3 are the alienees of the 5th appellant. Appellants 6 to 8 are the alienees of the second appellant.

( 3 ) ONE Kasimsaheb and Peersaheb are the full brothers. Kasimsaheb died on 13-11-1968 leaving behind his widow-the 5th appellant. Peersaheb died on 25-9-1987 leaving behind appellants 1 to 4 and the first respondent who are his children. 'a' schedule properties are agricultural lands situated at Kokatanur Village in Athani Taluk, 'b' schedule properties are agricultural lands situated at Tungal Village in Jamkhandi taluk, 'c' schedule properties are the house properties situated at Tungal village in Jamkhandi Taluk and 'd' schedule properties are the movable like tractor, pumpset, gold and silver ornaments and agriculture implements. The plaintiff in the suit submits that the suit schedule properties belong to her father and after his demise, she is entitled to l/3rd share in all the properties.

( 4 ) THE first defendant has filed his written statement contending that the lands bearing Sy. Nos. 1264, 1265 and 1266 of Kokatanur Village are the self-acquired properties of defendants 1 to 3 and that 'c' schedule house sites do not belong to their father Peersaheb and 'd' schedule properties also do not belong to Peersaheb. It is also stated that the plaintiff, in respect of her share, has taken gold ornaments worth about rs. 20,000/- and cash of Rs. 20,000/- for purchase of land to an extent of 25 acres in Tungal Village and has relinquished her share and therefore, not entitled to claim any share in the partition.

( 5 ) DEFENDANTS 2 to 4 have filed a memo adopting the written statement of the first defendant.

( 6 ) DEFENDANT 5 makes a contradictory claim against defendants 1 to 3 stating that the alleged relinquishment deed said to have been executed in the year 1976 in favour of Peersaheb is not binding and invalid. There was neither any necessity nor occasion to execute the same. Notwithstanding the alleged relinquishment deed she claims to be in actual possession of the suit lands of her deceased husband including VPC No. 42 of Tungal Village without interruption. During the lifetime of Kasimsaheb the husband of this defendant 5, the suit schedule 'd' property vpc No. 58 of Tungal Village was given to possession of defendant 6 by an agreement and thus states that, the plaintiff cannot levy any claim over the suit schedule properties.

( 7 ) DEFENDANT 6 has filed his written statement contending that, he is the bona fide purchaser of the house site bearing VPC No. 58 which belong to Kasimsaheb, and further submits that he is not a party in O. S. No. 220 of 1969 on the file of the learned Munsiff, Jamkhandi, between the 5th defendant and Peersaheb and as such, any decree passed in the said proceedings would not bind him. The 7th defendant has filed a memo adopting the written statement of 6th defendant.

( 8 ) THE Trial Court formulated as many as 10 issues broadly reflecting the controversial facts relating to the claim of the plaintiff to have 1/3rd share in the suit schedule properties. The plea set up by defendants 1 to 4 is that the plaintiff has relinquished her right in the properties by accepting gold worth Rs. 20,000/- and the claim of defendants 6 and 7 as bona fide purchase of VPC No. 58 of Tungal Village. The other issues relating to maintainability and Court fee are also framed.

( 9 ) THE Trial Court upheld the right of the plaintiff to seek for partition to an extent of l/12th share in the lands bearing Sy. Nos. 1264 and 1265 of Kokatanur Village and l/6th s