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

2023 Supreme(Kar) 655

H. P. SANDESH
P. Ramaprasad – Appellant
Versus
Thyagaraj R. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Rajendra M.S., Advocate, Srihari A.V., Advocate, A. Madhusudhana Rao, Advocate, Naveen, Advocate

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. Heard the petitioner's counsel and also the counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. The factual matrix of the case of respondent No.1 before the Trial Court while filing the suit in O.S.No.231/2019 contend that, one Nanjareddy had three sons, Ramareddy, Lingareddy and Munireddy of Agaram Village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore. The said family possessed vast properties in and around Agara Village and in Bangalore City. There was a family partition amongst the members of the Nanjareddy Family by virtue of O.S.No.1/1915-16 on the file of the Court of District Judge at Bangalore dtd. 8/10/1923, which got culminated in Final Decree proceedings vide FDP dtd. 14/5/1928.

3. In terms of the said proceedings shares of the respective parties therein were determined and definite shares were allotted to the parties therein as per the schedule appended. The plaintiff herein falls in the branch of Munireddy who had three sons and plaintiff is the grandson of Nanjunda S/o Munireddy. Late Munireddy got a definite share as per the judgment and decree and FDP proceedings and the said Munireddy died during the pendency of the suit leaving behind his three sons without getting an inch in su

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