HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
GANGAMMA W/O LATE CHANNABASAVEGOWDA – Appellant
Versus
MULLAMMA – Respondent
The captioned first appeal is filed by defendants
questioning the judgment and decree dated 5.10.2005 passed
in O.S.33/2002 wherein the learned Judge has granted the
alternative prayer for partition and separate possession and
thereby has decreed the suit by holding that the plaintiffs are
entitled for ½ share in all suit schedule properties.
2.
The parties are referred to as per their rank before
the trial Court for the sake of convenience.
3.
The facts leading to the case are as under:
4
3(a) The genealogy of the family is as under:
²ªÀ£ÀeÉÃUËqÀ (¥ÁªÀw)
ZÀ£Àß§¸ÀªÉÃUËqÀ(¥ÁªÀw)
ªÀÄÄzÉÝÃUËqÀ (¥ÁªÀw)
ºÉAqÀA¢gÀÄ 1) £ÀAdªÀÄä(¥ÁªÀw) 2)ªÀÄ®èªÀÄä(¥ÁªÀw)
ºÉAqÀw
ºÉAqÀw
H.K.ªÀÄļÉîUËqÀ(¥ÁªÀw)
ºÉAqÀw ªÀÄļÀîªÀÄä(70 ªÀµÀð)
PÀ¯ÉèÃUËqÀ(¥ÁªÀw) PÉÆÃ¦UËqÀ(¥ÁªÀw)
ºÉAqÀw £ÀAdªÀÄä(¥ÁªÀw) (ªÀÄPÀ̽î®è)
H.M.gÀ«PÀĪÀiÁgÀ(35ªÀµÀð) M.£ÉÃvÁæ£ÀAzÀ(32ªÀµÀð) H.M.¤gÀAdð(2ªÀµÀð)
ZÀ£Àß§¸ÀªÉÃUËqÀ(¥ÁªÀw)
ºÉAqÀw UÀAUÀªÀÄä (65 ªÀµÀð)
HC ªÀĺÉñÀégÀ¥Àà HC ±ÁAvÀPÀĪÀiÁgÀ HC ¸ÉÆÃªÀıÉÃRgï HC zsÀ£À°AUÉÃUËqÀ HC ªÀÄAdÄ£ÁxÀ
(45 ªÀµÀð) (38 ªÀµÀð) (35 ªÀµÀð) (30 ªÀµÀð) (27 ªÀµÀð)
3(b) The plaintiffs represent Mullegowda’s branch. The
plaintiffs have fi
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.