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

2023 Supreme(Kar) 1274

ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
Giriyavva – Appellant
Versus
Shivappa – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Sri. Ravi S. Balikai, Advocate Sri. K. Anandkumar, Advocate
For the Respondent:Anand R. Kolli, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

Mr Anant Ramanath Hegde, J. - Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The plaintiffs in O.S. No.69/2006 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Badami (for short, 'the Trial Court') are in appeal. The plaintiffs are aggrieved by the dismissal of the suit.

3. The suit was filed for the relief of partition and separate possession. The admitted genealogy of the parties read as under:

4. The suit is filed in respect of four immoveable properties listed in schedule 'B'. There is no dispute over the fact that the occupancy right is granted in respect of the suit schedule properties by the jurisdictional Land Tribunal. As far as item Nos.1, 2 and 3 properties are concerned, Form-7 is filed by Ramappa, the eldest son of propositus Heerappa, and occupancy is granted in his name.

5. As far as item No.4 property is concerned, Form No.7 is filed by Dyavapa, the second son of propositus Heerappa, and the occupancy is granted in his name.

6. The third son Hanamanth has not filed any Form No.7. The suit is filed by the children of Dyvappa referred above and also the children of Hanamanth referred above. The suit is filed against the branch

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