Back
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
H.P.SANDESH, J
SRI S. SATHYANARAYANA – Appellant
Versus
SRI S. RANGARAJU – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiffs allege shared ownership of a property. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. court evaluates evidence focusing on oral and documentary testimonies. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. defendants assert partition and sale negate plaintiffs' claims. (Para 9 , 10 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. previous partition supported by admissions and written records. (Para 12 , 15) |
| 5. court concludes the appeal lacks merit and dismisses. (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT
This matter is listed for admission today. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 03.03.2018 passed in R.A.No.186/2013 on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Mysuru.
3. The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiffs before the Trial Court is that the suit schedule property is the part and parcel of the entire Industrial site bearing No.37/B, measuring 200 x 245 feet. The same was allotted by CITB., in favour of the father of the plaintiffs and defendant Nos.1 and 3 and husband of defendant No.2 in the year 1979-80.
4. It is the contention of the plaintiffs in the suit that the suit schedule property is the joint family propert
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
