ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M. SHYAM PRASAD)

These appeals are against the judgment and decree dated 29.05.2018 in O.S.No.19/2010 on the file of I- Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Dharwad [for short ‘the civil Court’]. The civil Court by the impugned judgment and decree has decreed the suit in the following terms:

“The suit filed by the Plaintiff No.11 is hereby decreed.

The counterclaim sought by the Defendants No.1(a) to (h) is hereby dismissed.

The Plaintiff No.11 is entitled for 10/11^th undivided share of the Plaintiffs No.1 to 10 in the suit schedule properties by metes and bounds.

The Defendants No.1(a) to (h) are jointly entitled for 1/11th share in the suit schedule properties by metes and bounds.

The Defendants No.1(a) to (h) are hereby directed to pay required Court fee on their 1/11th share in the suit schedule properties, in accordance with law.”

2. This Court must at outset encapsulate the undisputed facts and circumstances of the case, and the encapsulation is thus. Sri. Nagendra Rao is the propositus, and he has died leaving behind his two sons, Sri Krishna Rao and Sri Dinakar. These sons have died respectively in the year 1974 and 1980, and Smt. Ruk