Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
ANU SIVARAMAN, VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
Vijaya Gopinath, W/o. Gopinath – Appellant
Versus
Rajendra Savanur, S/o. Late B.B. Savanur – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership based on release deed (Para 3 , 4 , 13) |
| 2. claims of misrepresentation and coercion (Para 5 , 6 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. trial court's findings on limitation (Para 7 , 12 , 15) |
| 4. limitations on challenging release deeds (Para 10 , 11 , 14) |
JUDGMENT :
ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
This Regular First Appeal is filed aggrieved by the Order on I.A.No.II passed by the X Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-26) ('trial Court' for short) dated 02.01.2024 in O.S.No.316/2023.
2. We have heard Shri. Srinivasa Murthy S.R, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, Shri. Ravi Prakash V, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 and Shri. T.P Vivekananda, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.
3. The father of plaintiffs/appellants and defendant No.1/respondent No.1-Late Shri. B.B Savanur, was allotted constructed house/suit schedule property by the Mysore Housing Board (now the Karnataka Housing Board) for a consideration of Rs.19,143/- and was given possession vide Possession Certificate dated 08.05.1969. Upon his demise, the property's Khata was transferred to his wife and following her death on 12.03.1995, the plaintiffs and defendant No.1 became the sole sur
The court reaffirmed that claims regarding a release deed are barred by limitation if the parties were consenting witnesses and did not promptly raise allegations of misrepresentation or fraud.
The validity of a release deed executed 37 years prior cannot be challenged based on fraud allegations that lack credible evidence, and claims for partition are barred by limitation.
The court found that vague allegations of fraud do not suffice to circumvent established limitation periods, and a registered deed remains binding unless disproven by specific and detailed allegation....
Legislature has not prescribed any period of limitation for filing a suit for partition because partition an incident attached to property and there is always a running cause of action for seeking pa....
A partition suit cannot be maintained without seeking cancellation of a registered release deed; an unchallenged release deed is valid and binding on all parties.
The limitation period for challenging a deed starts from the date of knowledge, not from its execution, allowing the suit for partition to proceed.
The judgment establishes the importance of providing sufficient evidence to disprove written documents and the requirement to seek further relief when filing a suit for mere declaration of right unde....
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
