SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top