Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
V SRISHANANDA
G. NARSIMHA MURTHY – Appellant
Versus
B. S. NARASIMHAIAH – Respondent
ORDER :
V SRISHANANDA, J.
Sri B.J.Mahesh, learned counsel on behalf of respondent Nos.5 and 6 is present. There is no possibility of amicable settlement having regard to the differences between the parties. Hence matter is taken up for consideration on merits.
2. Heard Sri C.M.Nagabushana, learned counsel for the revision petitioners, Sri B.J.Mahesh, learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 and 6, Sri Raja.R, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 and 7.
3. Defendant No.9 is the revision petitioner challenging the dismissal of the application filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure in OS No.221/2013 on the file of the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli.
4. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present revision petition are as under:
5. A suit in O.S No.221/2013 came to be filed with the following prayer in respect of following immovable properties (hereinafter referred as ‘suit properties’):
“Wherefore the plaintiffs above named most humbly pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass Judgment & Decree against the defendants:-
a) for the relief of partition and separate possession of the plaintiffs' joint and legitima
The Court upheld the dismissal of a plaint rejection application in a partition suit, affirming that substantial rights need adjudication, indicating that dismissals cannot be made on preliminary eva....
A granddaughter is entitled to seek partition of ancestral property, even during her father's lifetime, establishing daughters as coparceners under Hindu law.
The court ruled that a plaint cannot be dismissed for lack of a cause of action if it provides sufficient information for adjudication, leaving the question of limitation to be determined during tria....
Prior oral partitions must be supported by evidence during trial; dismissing the application without trial is justified when material facts aren't suppressed.
The court reaffirmed that a plaint cannot be dismissed under Order VII Rule 11 based solely on the defendant's contentions; it must be based on the plaintiff's allegations and the merits of the case ....
The amended Hindu Succession Act entitles daughters to seek partition regardless of prior registered partitions, affirming their rights to joint family properties.
The court affirmed that a second suit for partition is maintainable despite prior dismissal, recognizing differing rights under the Hindu Succession Act.
The court reiterated that issues of title and right to convey property require full trial, rejecting premature dismissal under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC.
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
