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

2004 Supreme(Kar) 381

V.GOPALA GOWDA
BASAVARAJ GUDDAPPA MALEBENNUR – Appellant
Versus
NINGAPPA GUDDAPPA MALEBENNUR – Respondent


V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.

( 1 ) THE appellants were defendants and respondents were plaintiffs in the Trial Court. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rank in the Trial Court.

( 2 ) THIS second appeal is filed by the defendants in O. S. No. 193/20 on the file of the Munsiff, Hirekerur, being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 15-7-2003 in R. A. No. 193 of 1992 reversing the judgment and decree dated 23-6-1992 passed by the Trial Court in the suit.

( 3 ) THE brief facts of the case are that the plaintiffs filed the suit for partition and separate possession of 6/13th share in the suit schedule properties and for mesne profits. The case of the plaintiffs is that the propositor Guddappa had two wives-2nd plaintiff and 6th defendant; that plaintiffs 1 and 3 to 6 are the children of 2nd plaintiff; that the 6th defendant is not the legally weeded wife of Guddappa; that after the death of Guddappa, the plaintiffs became the owners of the suit schedule properties; that the 6th defendant fraudulently concocted a Will and on the basis of the same the defendants got entered their names in the revenue records; that plaintiffs and defendants have got equal sha









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