Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD BENCH
ASHOK S.KINAGI
Prithvisingh Narayansingh Rajput – Appellant
Versus
Sunita D/o Tejsingh Rajput – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ASHOK S. KINAGI, J.
1. This Miscellaneous Second Appeal is filed by the appellant challenging the judgment and decree in R.A. No.175/2015 dated 08.03.2017, by the learned IX Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi.
2. For convenience, the parties are referred to based on their rankings before the FDP Court. The appellant was the petitioner, and the respondents herein were the respondents before the FDP court.
3. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows:
3.1 The petitioner filed a suit against the respondents in O.S. No.46/1984 for a partition and separate possession and for taking accounts. After a full-fledged trial, the suit was decreed vide Judgment dated 20.07.1993, holding that the petitioner is entitled to a 1/3rd share in item No.1 of the ‘B’ and ‘D’ schedule properties, and also a 1/4th share in item Nos.2 to 4 of the ‘B’ schedule properties. The Respondents, aggrieved by the Judgment and preliminary decree passed in O.S.No.46/1984, preferred an appeal in RFA No.282/1993 before this Court. The said appeal was partly allowed, and the Judgment and preliminary decree passed in the aforesaid suit was modified. The Respondents ,aggrie
The court affirmed that due process is crucial in partition proceedings, requiring court commissioners to adhere strictly to procedural mandates, including personal property inspections for accurate ....
Partition proceedings require careful consideration of equitable distribution and market value assessment to ensure fairness among co-owners, as emphasized in the judgment.
The court upheld the partition and equitable distribution of property based on the Commissioner's report, emphasizing the importance of amicable resolution in family disputes.
The court reaffirmed that partition must balance the established rights of original owners against claims of subsequent purchasers, applying equitable principles under the Partition Act, 1893.
The Court emphasized the need for proper measurement of plots as per sale deeds for partition and reiterated the position of law in respect of partition of immovable properties through the Court Comm....
Parties must raise objections during proceedings to ensure procedural fairness; failure to object undermines claims of prejudice in final decrees.
Parties must raise objections timely during proceedings; failure to do so constitutes acquiescence, validating the final decree and its property distribution.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
