JUDGMENT

1. This Regular Second Appeal is filed against the divergent findings by the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court in OS No.69/2006 by the learned I Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn), Chincholi and in RA No. 26/2008 by the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) Chincholi, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff for partition came to be decreed. The defendants are in appeal before this Court.

2. The parties would be referred to as per their ranks before the Trial Court for the sake of the convenience.

3. Brief facts are as below: The genealogical tree of the family of the plaintiff and defendants is not in dispute. The propositus of the family Hanmantappa had four sons and two daughters, namely; Bheemanna (who is now represented by defendant Nos. 4 to 7), Manikappa- the plaintiff, Shekhardefendant No.1, Sharanappa-defendant No.2 and Mallappa-defendant No.3 and two daughters, namely Droupadi and Narasamma.

4. The plaintiff-Manikappa contended that his two sisters i.e. Droupadi and Narasamma were given in marriage long back and since they were given money and gold at the time of the marriage, they are not made as parties to the suit. It was contended that due to the misunderstanding bet