Heard the learned counsel for appellant and learned

counsel for respondent.

2.

This appeal is filed by the appellant challenging the

order of the Trial Court dated 18.10.2022 wherein sought for

an order of injunction restraining the defendant to disturb the

plaintiff’s share and also interfering in respect of the Lakshmi

ganesh cleaning and Flour Mill in which the Trial Court rejected

the applications IA No.2 and 3 filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and

2 of CPC.

3.

The

factual

matrix

of

the

case

of

the

plaintiff/appellant before the Court that the suit schedule

properties are belong to the father of the plaintiff late

- 3 -

Sri.N.Rangaswamy died in 12.08.2020 leaving behind his wife

as his legal heir and then the mother of the plaintiff was also

died on 05.08.2021 leaving behind her children as their legal

heirs. The plaintiff is the elder son and the defendant is the

younger son. The plaintiff’s father i.e., Sri.N.Rangaswamy

during his life time had acquired site property bearing

assessment No.1570:1492:6188 measuring to an extent of

37½ feet, north to south 30 feet situated at NH-4 road,

Mallikapura, Lakshmi Ganesh Cleaning and Flour Mill, Sira

taluk, Tumkur District and ancestral property in which land

bearing Sy.No.313 measuring to an extent of 2.13 acres

situated at Magodu village, Kasaba hobli, Sira Taluk which are

morefully described in the schedule. Ever since the date of

purchase of the suit schedule properties, the father of the

plaintiff, plaintiff and defendant are in peaceful possession and

enjoyment of the suit schedule properties. Subsequently, the

plaintiff is an employee in KSRTC department since from 1988,

out of his hard earned money, the plaintiff has constructed a

duplex residential house by keeping the common stair case in

and out over the suit schedule property by obtaining all civil

amenities. Thereafter, the father of the plaintiff died on

- 4 -

12.08.2020 and at the time of the death of the plaintiff’s

mother, there was 2.50 gms of gold and house articles worth of

Rs.3,00,000/- by leaving behind her children as legal heirs to

succeed her estate. When the plaintiff and defendant are

staying together in different portion of the duplex house in the

said property, ever since the date of construction of the

residential house the plaintiff has invested the money for the

flour mill and flouring machine. The father of the plaintiff

looking after the business Lakshmi Ganesh cleaning and flour

mill and he was enjoying both ancestral property and the

property which he had acquired. After the demise of the

plaintiff’s father and mother, the plaintiff and defendant are

continued to be peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit

schedule properties. All the title deed and other documents of

the suit schedule property is standing in the name of the

defendant earlier which was in the name of their father i.e,

Sri.Rangaswamy.

4.

It is also the contention of the plaintiff that the suit

schedule properties are Hindu undivided joint family properties

of the plaintiff and defendant and they are in joint possession

and enjoyment of the same. The plaintiff submits the father of

- 5 -

the plaintiff was suffering from ill health and he was under

treatment and even he was not in a position to decide what is

right and what is wrong and by taking advantage of this, the

defendant indulged in creation of document of Will. The plaintiff

is the care taker of the father and he has made hectic effort for

the hospitalization of his father and the averments made in the

said Will are not the true fact. The plaintiff himself has met the

medical expenses of his father and got reimburse the same

from the KSRTC department. After the death of their father

misunderstanding

were

developed

among

them

causing

obstruction in using of the house and hence, the suit is for the

relief of partition and separate possession of 50% of his share

and consequential relief.

5.

Inter-alia the plaintiff has filed an application to

restrain the defe