CAV JUDGMENT

2. In RFA No.100028/2015 the plaintiff was arrayed as respondent no.7 and in this appeal, Shashikala and Leena were impleaded as his legal representatives.

The name of plaintiff’s wife is Shashikala. Defendant no.6 Beena is plaintiff’s daughter and defendant no.7 Kiran is his son. The suit properties consist of agricultural lands in Block nos.49, 50, 51, 54, 56, 57 and 142 of Yattinagudda village, Dharwad Taluk. The measurements and boundaries of these properties are shown in the plaint. The plaintiff and defendant no.6 being a minor purchased the suit properties under a registered sale deed dated 21.04.1973. The plaintiff himself represented his minor daughter at the time of purchase. Defendant no.6 attained majority in the year 1993. An entry was made in the revenue records indicating that plaintiff was discharged from the guardianship of his daughter, however his name continued in the revenue records to the extent of his share. The plaintiff’s wife, namely Shashikala induced him to enter the name of his minor son i.e., defendant no.7 in the record of rights relating to the suit