Challenging judgment and decree dated 02.09.2016 passed

by

II

Additional

District

and

Sessions

Judge,

Mandya

in

R.A.no.40/2015 and judgment and decree dated 21.09.2015 by

Senior Civil Judge, Maddur in O.S.no.40/2011, this appeal is filed.

2.

Appellants herein were defendants no.1 and 2, while

respondents no.1 to 3 herein were plaintiffs no.1 to 3 in original

suit. They will be referred to as such herein.

3.

Plaintiffs filed O.S.no.40/2011 seeking for partition and

separate

possession

of

their

1/4^th

share

in

land

bearing

Sy.no.282/2, measuring 01 acre 06 guntas of Maddur village

described as 8A9 schedule property and four houses and sites

no.380/360 measuring East-West 21 feet and North-South 25 feet;

site no.388/360 measuring East-West 21 feet and North-South 12½

feet; site no.388/360 measuring East-West 21 feet and North-

South 16½ feet and site no.388/360 measuring East-West 46 feet

and North-South 21 feet, situated at Madduramma Temple road,

Maddur described as described as 8B9 schedule properties (referred

to as 8suit properties9 for short).

4

4.

In plaint, it was stated that land bearing Sy.no.282

originally belonged to Khazi Abdul Rehaman Khan and plaintiffs9

grandfather was

it's tenant. After his death, their father

Sri.Doddathammaiah continued as tenant and thereafter by his

children namely, Smt.Gowramma, Sri.Thimmaiah, Smt.Muthamma

(Plaintiff no.1), Smt. Lakshmamma (Plaintiff no.2) and Smt.

Chikkolamma (Plaintiff no.3). Since Smt.Gowramma was elder

member of family and was residing with plaintiffs, she was

managing affairs of joint family as Karta. After coming into force of

amendment to Karnataka Land Reforms Act (referred to as 'KLR

Act' for short), she filed application for grant of occupancy rights,

on behalf of joint family. Her application was allowed by Land

Tribunal, Maddur, in proceedings no.LRF 548, 576, 543, 1171,

480/74-75 occupancy rights were grated to extent of 01 acre 06

guntas. It was stated that grant was in favour of joint family,

therefore, they were entitled for equal share in suit properties

including granted land.

5.

It was stated that relationship with Smt.Gowramma was

cordial. Therefore, they believed her statement that names of all

5

family members were entered in record of rights and they would be

given their share at appropriate time. But, taking undue advantage

of their illiteracy, she got only her name entered in revenue

records. After her death, defendants no.1 and 2 3 her husband and

daughter were attempting to get their names entered in revenue

records. At that time, they displayed hostile attitude towards

plaintiffs. Upon enquiry, they realized that Smt.Gowramma had got

her name entered illegally. They immediately preferred appeal

before Assistant Commissioner, Mandya. They also demanded

defendants to furnish accounts of income from joint family

properties. Upon refusal, they filed suit. It was also stated that

whereabouts of one of brothers was unknown and therefore he was

not made party to suit.

6.

On service of suit summons, defendants entered

appearance and filed written statement denying plaint averments.

They admitted that Khazi Abdul Rehaman Khan was owner of land

bearing Sy.no.282, but claimed Sri.Doddathammaiah - father of

Smt.Gowramma was tenant of said land. But due to his ill-health,

he surrendered tenancy. By that time Smt.Gowramma was married

6

to defendant no.1 had attained age of majority and began residing

with her father. He died in year 1962. Therefore, Smt.Gowramma

and defendant no.1 took up responsibility of family. Defendant no.1

sold

his

ancestral

property

situated

in Kondapura

Village,

Channapatna Taluk and performed marriage of plaintiffs. They were

well settled in houses of their respective husbands. Thereafter,

Smt.Gowramma took up tenancy of Sy.no.282 and cultivated same

for her livelihood. On 14.01.1980, she divided 8B9 schedule

properties with Sri.Thimmaiah 3 her brother, wherein items no.2 to

4 fell to her share, item no.1 was allotted to Sri.Thimmaia