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

2004 Supreme(Kar) 652

V.G.SABHAHIT
DODDAMMA – Appellant
Versus
MUNIYAMMA – Respondent


Advocates:
G.L.Vishwanath, K.K.Thayamma, M.R.C.Manohar, M.T.Nanaiah

V. G. SABHAHIT, J.

( 1 ) THESE appeals by the plaintiff are directed against the judgment and decree passed by the I Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), bangalore, in R. A. Nos. 207 of 1997 and 2 of 1998, dated 18-12-1999 setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the Court of Civil judge (Junior Division), Bangalore, in O. S. No. 50 of 1987, dated 26-11-1997 and dismissing the suit of the plaintiff.

( 2 ) THE essential facts of the case leading upto these appeals with reference to the rank of the parties before the Trial Court are as follows: the plaintiff filed the suit for partition and separate possession of half share in the suit schedule properties by metes and bounds averring that one Buddappa. The grandfather of the plaintiff had three sons by name Thimmappa, Thayappa and Junjappa. They had ancestral properties and were living together enjoying the ancestral properties. After some time Junjappa the youngest son of Buddappa took his share in the joint family property and started living separately. The other two sons Thimmappa and Thayappa have taken their shares jointly and they have not partitioned the property between them. The plaintiff was the only issue to Tha























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