The court affirmed that a second suit for partition is maintainable despite prior dismissal, recognizing differing rights under the Hindu Succession Act.

ORDER :

V. SRISHANANDA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Defendant No.2 in O.S No.52/2019 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Channagiri, is the revision petitioner challenging the Order dated 10.06.2024 dismissing the application filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present revision petition are as under:

Plaintiff in the suit namely Lakshmiranganatha.R is the son of Sri S.G.Ramachandrachar and Smt.Rathnamma (defendant No.1). Govindachar was the head of the family and common prepositus. Ramachandrachar had eight children namely, R.Narasimhamurthy, R.Rajamma, R.Srinivasa, R.Lakshmiranganatha (plaintiff), R.Lakshminarayana, R.Lakshmidevi, R.Amruthamma, R.Krishnamurthy.

4. Revision Petitioner further revealed that eighth child of Sri Ramachandrachar, namely R.Krishnamurthy had filed a suit earlier in O.S No.48/2014, which on contest came to be dismissed and there was no appeal against the said judgment and it has attained finality.

5. It is also found from the records that the present plaintiff sailed with the second defendant in the said suit by adopting the written statement.

6. However a second suit (present suit in O.S.No.52/2019) for partition came to be filed by another son by name Sri Lakshmiranganatha for the following relief in respect of the following properties.

“THEREFORE, the plaintiff, prays that this Hon'ble court be pleased to pass a judgment and decree against the defendants for;

a) Declaration that partition deed executed by the defendant No.2 and 4 with respect to the joint family properties is not binding on the share of the plaintiff and remaining members of the joint family.

b) Further declaration that the alleged deed of relinquishment alleged to have been executed by defendant No.8 in favour of defendant No.1 is also not binding on the share of the plaintiff and remaining members of the joint family.

c) Further declaration that, the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.48/2014 dated:27-10-2016 is also not binding on the share of the plaintiff and remaining members schedule properties by metes and bounds.

e) Permanent injunction restraining the defendant No.1, 2 and 4, their men, agents, servants or representatives from changing the nature of the suit schedule properties in any manner taking advantage of the previous fabricated documents at their own whims and fancy in any manner.

f) For court cost and such other relief that this Hon'ble court deem fit to grant under the circumstances of the case in the ends of justice.

DESCRIPTION OF SUIT PROPERTIES

'A' SCHEDULE PROPERTIES

The land measuring 3 acres 33 guntas situated in Sy.No.21/2 of Haronahalli village, Channagiri Taluk, Davanagere District bounded by:

East: PWD Road [Bhadravathi to Channagiri]

West: Land belonging to Gowdru Basavarajappa

North: Land belonging to the Ajjihalli Hanumanthappa and brothers

South:Land belonging to Thippeshappa and Jayamurthy

2. The land measuring 6 acres 09 guntas situated in Sy.No.23/1 and 0.24 acres situated in Sy.No.23/3 which are adjacent to each other situated at Haronahalli village, Channagiri Taluk, Davanagere District bounded by:

East: Land of M.B. Gowramma and M.N. Shivamurthy

West: Sunigere to Haronahalli Road

North: Garden land of Ajjihalli Prabhu [Babanna]

South:Land of Hanumanthappa and brothers

3. The land measuring 3 acres 19 guntas situated in Sy.No.76/18P Erehalli village, Channagiri Taluk, Davanagere District bounded:

East: Land of Narasoji Rao

West: Land of Ittige Basavarajappa and Gowd