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

2004 Supreme(Kar) 19

K.SREEDHAR RAO
NAGANNA B. NINGAPPA – Appellant
Versus
SHIVANNA – Respondent


Advocates:
M.N.Umashankar, MAHANTESH S.HOSAMATH

K. SREEDHAR RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE appeal filed against the judgment and decree passed in RA32/02 on the file of the District Judge, Mandya arising out of the judgment and decree passed in O. S. No. 96/00 on the file of Civil Judge, senior Division, Maddur.

( 2 ) THE appellant is the defendant in the suit. The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction against the defendant not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property bearing Sy. No. 265 measuring 3 guntas in Kadukothanahalli of Maddur taluk. The plaintiff submits that the plaintiff and defendant are brothers. In the year 1981 there was a partition amongst the brothers and a written memorandum of partition was recorded on 12-9-1982 styled as palupatti. Six months thereafter there was redistribution of properties in partition under Ex. P2, according to which the plaintiff was allotted the suit property and claims to be in possession. The suit is filed seeking declaration of title and injunction when the defendant took hostile attitude.

( 3 ) THE defendant denied the case of the plaintiff contending that Ex. P2 is concocted, denied the right, title and possession of the plai






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