JUDGMENT

SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR, J. -

The question arising for decision in both the appeals is, whether the plaintiffs and defendants 1, 5 and 6 are precluded from taking possession of Plaint-B schedule property (other than B-1 schedule property) in proportion to the shares declared by the trial court in its preliminary decree dtd. 26/4/2019 in O.S.No.2/2009 followed by final decree dtd. 30/5/2020 in FDP.No.13/2019 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Dharwad?"

2. These two appeals have the following factual background.

2.1 The appellants in both the appeals are the legal representatives of defendant No.12, Holiyappa, the adopted son of Siddalingappa Bulla. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are the plaintiffs in the suit. The plaintiffs brought a suit for partition in respect of eight items of the property described in A schedule and three items of property described in B schedule of the plaint on the premise that after the death of their father Marithimmappa on 17/6/1964, they became entitled to 1/5th share each in the properties described in schedules A and B. Defendant No.1 is the brother and defendant Nos.5 and 6 are the sisters of the plaintiffs. Defendant No.2 is the wife and