Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
V.SRISHANANDA
C.M. Madaiah, S/o C.T. Monnappa – Appellant
Versus
C.M. Poonacha, S/o C.M. Medaiah – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
V. SRISHANANDA, J.
Heard Sri. Shathabish Shivanna for the appellant.
None appears for the second respondent.
2. First Defendant Sri. C.M. Medaiah who is the father of the plaintiff namely Sri. C.M. Poonacha is the appellant in this second appeal.
3. Facts which are at most necessary for disposal of the present appeal are as under:
The first respondent Sri. C.M. Poonacha filed a suit in O.S. No.27/2006 for partition and separate position of his share in the suit property. Suit on contest came to be decreed.
4. To seek the partition of the suit property by metes and bounds, final decree proceedings in FDP No.7/2012 was filed In the Final Decree Proceedings, after entertaining the objections, learned Trial Judge appointed an advocate as Court Commissioner on 06.12.2012. Said advocate Court Commissioner visited the suit property by issuing notice to the parties. Parties were present when the Court Commissioner carried out the spot inspection and divided the property in the presence of the parties and prepared the panchnama and the sketch with colour codification.
5. Court Commissioner filed the report on 30.07.2016 along with revenue sketch, survey PP sheet, mahazar, notices issued
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.
In partition suits, the lack of documentary evidence undermines objections to Commissioner's findings, affirming equitable distribution based on thorough assessments.
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.
Partition proceedings require careful consideration of equitable distribution and market value assessment to ensure fairness among co-owners, as emphasized in the judgment.
Second appeal – Suit for partition - Second appeal - Unless defendants also place reliable and convincing materials to substantiate same and when defendants have failed to substantiate their objectio....
The first Appellate Court must address all issues and contentions raised by the parties and record findings supported by reasons on all issues and contentions.
A property not capable of partition due to practical constraints may be sold under the Partition Act, despite objections from co-owners regarding involuntary sale.
The court established that under the Partition Act, a court may direct the sale of property instead of division when it is determined that division is not feasible or would not be beneficial to the s....
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
