- 1 -
RSA No. 100720 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 100720 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
BASAYYA S/O NAGAYYA MARASANGAYYANAVAR
AGE: 45 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: MANSUR,TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. S B DODDAGOUDAR.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SIDDRAYYA S/O NAGAYYA MARASANGAYYANAVAR
AGE: 52 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: MANSUR,TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.
2.
IRAYYA S/O ONAGAYYA MARASANGAYYANAVAR
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: MANSUR,TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.
3.
SMT.KALLAVVA W/O NINGAYYA MATAPATI
AGE: 54 YEARS,OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: MANSUR,TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAKESH M BILKI ADV. FOR SRI. SHIVARAJ C
BELLAKKI, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-3)
THIS RSA IS FILED U/SEC.100 OF CPC, 1908, AGAINST
THE
& DECREE DTD:11.7.2018 PASSED IN
R.A.NO.34/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM., DHARWAD, DISMISSING THE APPEAL
AND
CONFIRMING
JUDGMENT
AND
DECREE
DTD:21.2.2017, PASSED IN O.S. NO.224/2010 ON THE FILE OF
THE II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
FIRST CLASS-II COURT, DHARWAD PARTLY DECREEEING THE
SUIT FILED FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.
ANNAPURNA
CHINNAPPA
DANDAGAL
Digitally
signed by
ANNAPURNA
CHINNAPPA
DANDAGAL
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
- 2 -
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Though the matter is listed for admission, with
the consent of the learned counsel for parties, the
matter is taken up for final disposal.
The present second appeal is filed by the
defendant No.1 assailing judgment and decree dated
11.07.2018 passed in R.A.No.34/2017 on the file of
the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM., Dharwad,
confirming the judgment and decree dated 21.02.2017
in O.S.No.224/2010 on the file of the II Additional Civil
Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class-II Court,
Dharwad.
The parties herein are referred to as per
their ranking before trial Court for the sake of
convenience.
- 3 -
4.
Plaintiff-respondent No.1 has filed suit for
partition and separate possession in respect of suit
schedule properties.
5.
The suit schedule properties are:
a) Agricultural land bearing Sy.No.98/1,
measuring
4
Acres-30
Guntas,
assessed
at
Rs.34-28,
situated
at
Mansur + Sannasomapur village, Tq
and Dist: Dharwad.
b) VPC No.39, the House and opne space,
situated in Mansur + Sannasomapur
village, Tq and Dist: Dharwad.
c) VPC No.222, the house and open space
situated in Mansur + Sannasomapur
village, Tq and Dist: Dharwad.
6.
One
Sri.Nagayya
S/o
Siddarayya
Marasangayyanavar, is original propositus of plaintiff’s
and defendants and the suit schedule properties are
the self acquired properties of deceased Sri.Nagayya.
Smt.Kallavva is the first wife of deceased Sri.Nagayya
and Sri.Basayya-defendant No.1 is their son, after the
- 4 -
death of Kallavva Nagayya married Chinnavva and
plaintiff and defendant Nos.2 and 3 are their children
and members of Hindu undivided family. It is averred
that during the lifetime of Sri.Nagayya, he had
executed a Will equally in favour of the children and
handed over the said Will to Kallappa Yattinagudda of
Manasur village. It is stated that the defendant No.1
had not agreed for partition in respect of VPC No.222
house and open space i.e. item no.1C suit schedule
property. It is averred that defendant No.1 has
entered his name in the record of rights and
constructed a house without giving any share in
respect of item no.1C of the suit schedule property.
7.
Pursuant to the summons issued by the
trial Court, the defendants appeared and filed their
written statement.
8.
Defendant No.1 specifically contended that
VPC No.222 item No.1C is self acquired property of the
defendant No.1 and plaintiff and other defendants
- 5 -
have no right over the suit schedule property and
sought to dismiss the suit.
9.
The defendant Nos.2 and 3 filed common
written statement admitting the entire case of the
plaintiff.
10. On basis of the pleadings, the trail Court
framed following issues:
1. Whether the plaintiff proves that the suit
schedule properties are the self acquired
properties of deceased Nagayya?
2. Whether the defendant No.1 proves that
the suit schedule 'C' property is his self
acquired property?
3.. Whether the defendant No.1 proves that
the suit is not properly valued and Court
fee paid is insufficient?
4. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the
relief of particular as claimed?
- 6 -
5. What order of decree?
11. In order to substantiate, plaintiff examined
himself as P.W.1 and examined two witnesses as
P.W.2 and P.W.3 and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.19.
Defendant examined himself as D.W.1 and examined
one witness as D.W.2 and got marked Ex.D.1 and to
Exs.P.40.
12. Trial Court on the basis of
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.