Partition rights established through valid public documents can negate claims based on later, disputed wills; the court upheld prior partitions and addressed issues of inheritance rights arising from legitimate familial relationships.

JUDGMENT :

SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR, J.

This appeal is filed by defendants No.1 to 3 praying to set-aside the judgment and decree dated 21.03.2012 passed in R.A.No.143/2004 by the Fast Track Court – II, Bidar confirming the judgment and decree dated 30.06.2004 passed in O.S.No.52/1995 by the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn), Bidar.

2. The appellants No.1 to 3 were defendants No.1 to 3 and respondents No.1 to 4 were plaintiffs No.1 to 4 in O.S.No.52/1995.

3. The case of the plaintiffs as averred in the plaint is that plaintiff No.1 is the son and other plaintiffs are the daughters born to late – Sri. Neelkanthrao through his legally wedded wife namely Smt. Neelamma wife of Neelkanthrao now deceased. The father of the plaintiffs namely Neelhanthrao and plaintiff No.1 were joint owners in possession of the ancestral lands Sy.No.51 measuring 21 acres 01 gunta now entered in the ROR as Sy.No.51/A measuring 10 acres 28 guntas R.A. of Rs.11.75 paise and Sy.No.51/2AA measuring 10 acres 28 guntas R.A. of Rs.11.74 paise and Sy.No.89 entirely measuring 28 acres 01 gunta now entered in the ROR as Sy.No.89/A measuring 14 acres 01 gunta of R.A. Rs.35-4 paise and Sy.No.89/AA measuring 14 acres R.A. of Rs.35-46 paise and a residential house bearing Panchayat No.111 and cattle shed bearing Panchayat No.22, all situated at village Hokrana Tq: and Dist: Bidar.

a) Plaintiff No.1 along with his father were jointly cultivating the said suit lands as coparceners and the plaintiffs father - Neelkanthrao in the capacity of Manager and Karta of Hindu Joint family consisting of himself, his wife – Smt. Neelamma and plaintiff No.1 a coparcener, managed the family affairs till his life time. Plaintiffs Nos.2 to 4 after their marriages residing along with their respective husbands.

b) The father of plaintiff No.1 namely Neelkanthrao expired on 01.06.1991 after a long sickness. After his death the entire suit properties are inherited and succeeded by the plaintiffs as joint owners and joint possessors, as the plaintiffs’ mother – Smt. Neelamma had already expired.

c) During the life time of the father, in order to see that the above said suit lands should not exceeds the ceiling limits prescribed under the Land Reforms Act, has got entered the suit lands Sy.No.51/2-AA measuring 10 acres 28 guntas and Sy.No.99/AA measuring 14 acres in the name of plaintiff No.1 and the remaining suit lands have been detained by him in his name without effecting any partition of the joint family properties. Even if, the entries were made in the name of plaintiff No.1, but plaintiff No.1 and his father both have jointly cultivated all the suit lands detailed above in the capacity of joint owners and joint possessors and no partition by metes and bounds has taken place.

d) After death of the father, the plaintiffs have succeeded to the suit properties in the capacity of joint owners and plaintiff No.1 being the only male member in the family is cultivating the suit lands in the capacity of a Karta and Manager.

e) In fact, the defendants have got no right or interest and they are not concerned either with the family or the properties of the plaintiffs, but defendant No.1 is malafidely claiming herself to the second wife of late - Neelkanthrao and she also claims that defendant Nos.2 and 3 are her daughters born through late - Neelkanthrao. But in fact, defendant No.1 is neither the second wife nor defendant Nos.2 and 3 are born through Neelkanthrao. The said Neelkanthrao cannot take the second wife and marry with defendant No.1 during the year 1962 during the life time of his legally wedded wife – Smt. Neelamma who has expired during the year 1988. As such, the defendants have got no right in the suit properties.

f) After the death of plaintiff's father, defendant No.1 approached the village accountant for sanction of mutation of land Sy.No.51/2A and Sy.No.89/A which were nominally standing in the name of late - Neelkanthrao on the bogus grounds that late - Neelkanthrao had bequeathed the said l