Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
E.S.INDIRESH
H.L. Karibasappa S/o H. Lokeshappa – Appellant
Versus
Ningamma Since Deceased Rep. by LRs. B.V. Chandrashekara – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
E.S. INDIRESH, J.
1. RSA No.2358 of 2017 is filed by the defendant No.1, assailing the judgment and decree dated 13.09.2017 in R.A.No.76 of 2012 on the file of Senior Civil Judge at Somawarapete, dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment and decree dated 25.09.2012 in O.S.No.28 of 2003 on the file of Additional Civil Judge at Somawarapete, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff.
2. RSA No.2359 of 2017 is filed by the defendant No.1, assailing the judgment and decree dated 13.09.2017 in R.A.No.16 of 2013 on the file of Senior Civil Judge at Somawarapete, dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment and decree dated 25.09.2012 in O.S.No.29 of 2003 on the file of Additional Civil Judge at Somawarapete, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff.
3. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred with reference to their rank before the Trial Court.
4. Facts in both the original suits are almost identical in nature. Facts in nutshell as averred in the plaint are that, the plaintiff along with her brother - Basappa had purchased the land bearing Sy.No.76, measuring 4.94 acres at Gummanacolly Village, as per the registered Sale Deed dated 31.05.2000. Thereafter, registered part
A registered sale deed is presumed valid, and the burden to prove fraud lies on the party alleging it, requiring substantial evidence to support such claims.
Sale - Validity - Defendants were not interested or they did not try to bring their case before court and lead evidence in support of their case to with respect to sale deed being sham, bogus or frau....
The plaintiff must prove the execution of the contract and her readiness to perform to be entitled to specific performance under the Specific Relief Act, and the mere registration of a document does ....
The Court upheld the validity of the earliest sale deed, ruling that subsequent transactions without proper authority and consent are void, while affirming jurisdiction based on registration location....
The possession is a pure question of fact, and the findings of fact recorded by the lower courts cannot be interfered with unless they are based on no evidence or are perverse.
There is no prohibition on entertaining a second appeal even on a question of fact provided court is satisfied that findings of fact recorded by courts below stood vitiated by non-consideration of re....
Proper party inclusion is essential in property disputes, and claims of fraud must be substantiated by convincing evidence.
The burden of proving the execution of a Will rests on the propounder, who must dispel any suspicious circumstances to establish its validity.
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
