Daughters are entitled to equal shares with sons in ancestral properties, as established by recent judicial pronouncements affirming their coparcener rights.

JUDGMENT :

SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR, J. 

1. The appellants/defendant Nos.1 to 4 have filed this appeal challenging the Judgment and decree dated 09.09.2019 passed in O.S.No.150/2016 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi.

2. Cross Objections are filed by the respondent Nos.2 to 5/plaintiff Nos.2 to 5, praying to allot 1/7^th share to each of them in the suit schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ house properties as against 1/14^th share to each allotted by the trial Court.

3. The appellants are defendant Nos.1 to 4, respondent Nos.1 to 5 are plaintiff Nos.1 to 5 and respondent No.6 is the defendant No.5 in O.S.No.150/2016. The plaintiffs had filed the said suit claiming share in the following suit schedule A, B and C properties.

(a) House bearing Corporation No.2-35 and P.I.D.No.42528;

(b) House bearing Corporation No.2-36 & P.I.D. No.42529, both situated at main road, Jagat, Kalaburagi;

(c) Land bearing Sy.No.124/4 measuring 3 acres 32 guntas with R.A. of Rs.2-00, situated at Gobbur (B), Tq. Afzalpur, district Kalaburagi.

4. It is the case of the plaintiffs that, the deceased Parameshwara and defendant No.5 are the children of one Ganapathrao S/o. Narasinghrao and Sharanubai. The said Ganapathrao died long back and Sharanubai died on 26.02.2016. The defendant Nos.1 to 4 are wife and children of late Parameshwara. The said Ganapathrao acquired suit schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ house properties, and after his death they were standing in the name of his wife-Sharanubai. The said Sharanubai was in possession of land bearing Survey No.29 of Kotnoor (D) village and it has been acquired by Gulabarga Development Authority. The Gulabarga Development Authority has formed a layout and allotted one plot to Sharanubai bearing Plot No.2505/1, measuring 60 X 40 feet, in the year 2012. Smt. Sharanubai sold the said plot HC-KAR and out of the sale proceeds, she purchased suit schedule ‘C’ landed property bearing Survey No.124/4, measuring 3 acres 32 guntas. After the death of Ganapathrao, Parameshwara got entered his name to the suit house properties. The plaintiffs claimed equal share in the suit schedule properties.

5. The defendant Nos.1 to 4 filed written statement denying the relationship of the plaintiffs and defendant No.5 with Ganapathrao, Sharanubai and defendant Nos.1 to 4. The defendants contended that, suit schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ house properties were standing in the name of Ganapathrao and he inherited them from his father. After the death of Ganapathrao, the house properties were mutated in the name of Sharanubai. Smt. Sharanubai gifted away schedule ‘A’ and ‘B’ house properties in favour of Parameshwara on 16.06.2006. They contend that, the house properties are self acquired and are absolute properties of Parameshwara. They contend that, Parameshwara during his life time, purchased schedule ‘C’ landed property bearing Survey No.124/4, measuring 3 acres 32 guntas in the name of his mother Sharanubai and he had paid the sale consideration. The HC-KAR defendant Nos.1 to 4 contended that, the plaintiffs and defendant No.5 are not daughters of Ganapathrao and Sharanubai.

6. On the basis of the said pleadings, the trial Court has framed following issues:

(1) Whether the plaintiffs prove that the suit properties are the joint family properties?

(2) Whether the plaintiffs prove that they have got 1/7^th share in the suit properties?

(3) Whether the plaintiffs prove that they are the daughters of deceased Ganapathrao?

(4) Whether the defendants No.1 to 4 prove that the deceased Sharanubai has legally gifted the suit houses bearing Corporation No.20-35 and 2-36 in favour of defendant No.4 by executing gift deed bearing document No.2561/2006-07 on dated 16.06.2006?

(5) Whether the defendants No.1 to 4 prove that the suit houses are the self acquired properties of the deceased Parameshwara?

(6) Whether the defendants No.1 to 4 prove that the suit land bearing Sy.No.124/4 is the self acquired properties of deceased Parameshwara?

(7) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for the r