The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of the Plaintiffs to a 1/4th share in the joint family ancestral properties and the invalidity of the registered Will Deed.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. The above first appeal is filed by Defendant Nos.1 to 3 under Sec. 96 of the CPC challenging the judgment and decree dtd. 30/6/2016 passed in OS.No.99/2008 by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi (hereinafter referred to as the 'Trial Court'), whereunder the suit for partition filed by the Plaintiffs has been partly decreed.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their rank before the Trial Court.

3. It is the case of the Plaintiffs that one Rudrappa s/o. Murgeppa is the propositus and head of the family. He had two sons, Murgeppa and Revanasiddappa and two daughters Lakshmibai and Kamalabai. Murgeppa, the elder son died in August, 1973. The Plaintiffs are the wife and daughter of deceased Murgeppa. The other children of Rudrappa, namely Revanasiddappa, Lakshmi Bai and Kamala Bai are arrayed as Defendants 1, 4 and 5 respectively. Revanasiddappa has two sons, Amresh and Satish who are arrayed as Defendant Nos.2 and 3 respectively.

3.1 The suit properties 1 to 8 are agricultural lands and two residential houses which are described as suit schedule (II) property. That Defendant No.1 without any right or title got the suit properties mutated in his name and his sons favour and by taking advantage of the same is trying to alienate the suit properties. Hence, the plaintiff has filed the suit seeking the following reliefs:

"a) A decree for partition and separate possession of the suit properties be passed holding the plaintiffs as entitled to 1/2 share together (or 1/4th each) by metes and bounds in all the suit properties.

b) A decree declaring that the registered Will Deed document No. 32/ 1991-92 dtd. 7/2/1992 is invalid, null and void and not binding on the rights of plaintiffs' share in the suit properties, be granted.

c) A decree directing the revenue/panchayat official to correct the revenue/panchayat records by way of inserting the names of plaintiffs alongwith the defendants, in respect of suit properties be passed.

d) A decree for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from selling, mortgaging, encumbering or dealing with the suit properties in any manner so for the rights and share of the plaintiffs over suit properties are concerned, be granted.

d(i) Alternatively plaintiff be declared as the owner of the suit land sy no.460 and be put in actual possession of the same by dispossessing defendants and or any body through or under them.

e) Costs of the suit be awarded.

f) Any other relief to which the plaintiffs are entitled to may also granted."

3.2. It is the case of the Plaintiffs that the suit properties are the joint family and ancestral properties and are in joint possession of the Plaintiffs and Defendant No.1. That some of the suit properties have been collusively and illegally got mutated in the names of Defendant Nos.2 and 3 in collusion with the Revenue and Panchayath officials by the active participation and instance of Defendant No.1 without the knowledge and consent of the Plaintiffs. That the husband of Plaintiff No.1 was a Teacher in a Government School and fickle minded person and was neither looking after the family properties nor was managing the same. The propositus Rudrappa although being head of the family, he being aged and not having worldly knowledge, Defendant No.1 was virtually handling all the family matters and having complete control over the family affairs. That after the death of the husband of Plaintiff No.1, she and her daughter continued in the joint family. The marriage of Plaintiff No.2 was performed during the lifetime of Rudrappa in the year 1991-92. Thereafter, Rudrappa died in the year 1993. That after the marriage, the Plaintiff No.2 started residing in the house of her husband while Plaintiff No.1 continued to reside in her marital home.

3.3. It is the further case of the Plaintiffs that Defendant No.1 who was in total control and management of the family affairs and properties was looking after and providing for the m