SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 35491

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
K. NATARAJAN, J
SRI G SHEKAR – Appellant
Versus
SRI GOVINDARAJ – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:R.V. NAIK ,Respondent Advocate: PARVATHY R NAIR

Table of Content
1. plaintiff filed a suit (Para 4)
2. counsel for the appellant (Para 5)
3. per contra learned counsel (Para 6)
4. it is settled possession of law (Para 7 , 8)

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal filed by the appellant/defendant No.2 under Section 96 of CPC., for setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the XX Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge (CCH-32), Bangalore, in OS.No.6676/2013 dated 09.12.2019.

2. Counsel for the respondent No.3 present, respondent No.2 though the counsel for respondent No.1 undertaken to file vakalath but not filed any vakalath, hence respondent No.2 treated as served, unrepresented.

3. The rank of the parties before the Trial Court is retained for the sake of convenience.

4. The case of the plaintiff before the Trial Court is that the plaintiff filed a suit for partition and separate possession seeking 1/5th share (1/4th share after death of the 1st defendant) in respect of house list No.147, new No.16 and also house list No.59 situated at Adugodi village, Bangalore. Notice was served on the defendant Nos.2 to 4, though advocate appeared but not contest the matter. The defendant No.1 said to be deleted i.e., father of the plaintiff as well as other t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top