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

2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 33055

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

AND

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA

RFA NO.200142/2019 (PAR)

BETWEEN:

1.

Smt. Shankaramma W/o Late Ramanna,

Age: Major, Occ: Household,

R/o Kasaba Lingasugur,

Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur-584 122.

2.

Anand S/o Late Ramanna,

Age: 23 years, Occ: Student,

R/o Kasaba Lingasugur,

Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur-584 122.

3.

Shruthi D/o Late Ramanna,

Age: 21 years, Occ: Student,

R/o Kasaba Lingasugur,

Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur-584 122.

4.

Sudha D/o Late Ramanna,

Age: 19 years, Occ: Student,

R/o Kasaba Lingasugur,

Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur-584 122.

... Appellants

(By Sri Ajaykumar A.K., Advocate)

2

AND:

1.

Smt. Balamma W/o Mallappa Jeer,

Age: 78 years, Occ: Agriculture,

R/o Kasaba Lingasugur,

Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur-584 122.

2.

Smt. Parvathi W/o Subbayya Hugar,

Age: 46 years, Occ: Agriculture,

R/o Kasaba Lingasugur,

Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur-584 122.

3.

Smt. Prema W/o Amarappa

@ Amaresh Hotel,

Age: 44 years, Occ: Agriculture,

R/o Kasaba Lingasugur,

Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur-584 122.

4.

Smt. Gangamma W/o Veerbhadrappa,

Age: 51 years, Occ: Agriculture,

R/o H.No.1/2, Hutti (Jatti Lane),

Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur-584 122.

5.

Rekha D/o Veerbhadrappa,

Age: 27 years, Occ: Agriculture,

R/o H.No.1/2, Hutti (Jatti Lane),

Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur-584 122.

6.

Basavaraj S/o Veerbhadrappa,

Age: 24 years, Occ: Agriculture,

R/o H.No.1/2, Hutti (Jatti Lane),

Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur-584 122.

7.

Akkamma D/o Veerbhadrappa,

Age: 24 years, Occ: Agriculture,

R/o H.No.1/2, Hutti (Jatti Lane),

Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur-584 122.

8.

Amaresh S/o Veerbhadrappa,

Age: 23 years, Occ: Student,

3

R/o H.No.1/2, Hutti (Jatti Lane),

Tq: Lingasugur, Dist: Raichur-584 122.

... Respondents

* * *

This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of

the Code of Civil Procedure, praying to allow the appeal by

setting aside the order dated 13.08.2018 passed in FDP

No.02/2013

by

the

Senior

Civil

Judge

and

JMFC,

Lingasugur, filed by respondent Nos.1 to 3 with costs

throughout.

This appeal coming on for hearing on I.A. this day,

K.S. Hemalekha J., delivered the following:

The present appeal is by respondent Nos.6(a) to

(d) in FDP No.02/2013, assailing the order dated

13.08.2018 passed in FDP No.02/2013 by the Senior

Civil Judge & JMFC, Lingasugur.

For the sake of convenience, the parties

would be referred to as per their ranking before the

Trial Court.

The

plaintiffs

filed

O.S.No.7/2007

for

partition and separate possession and for enquiry into

4

mense profit on the ground that the original

propositus Mallappa (died) and his wife Balamma-

defendant

No.1

had

four

children

namely,

Veerabhadrappa, Ramanna-defendant No.2, Parvathi-

defendant No.3, Prema-Defendant No.4; Gangamma-

plaintiff No.1 is the wife of Veerabhadrappa and

Rekha-plaintiff

No.2,

Basavaraj-plaintiff

No.3,

Akkamma-Plaintiff No.4 and Amresh-Plaintiff No.5 are

the children of Veerbhadrappa and Gangamma.

It is the contention of the plaintiffs that the

suit properties are the ancestral joint family properties

of the plaintiffs and defendants and there is no

partition by metes and bounds and that defendant

Nos.3 and 4 are the married daughters and they have

been given their share by way of gold, silver and

money at the time of marriage. It is further contended

that the said Veerabhadrappa, the husband of plaintiff

No.1 had 4/9th share in the suit schedule properties

5

and on his death the plaintiffs have got 4/9th share.

Since there were differences between the plaintiffs

and defendants, the defendants denied the crop share

after the death of Veerabhadrappa and also denied the

share that has to be allotted in the suit schedule

properties and thus, the plaintiffs sought for 4/9th

share in the suit schedule properties.

In pursuance of the summons issued by the

Trial Court, defendant Nos.1 and 2 appeared and filed

their written statements contending and admitting the

relationship of the plaintiffs and defendants. But,

however contended that the suit is bad for non-joinder

of necessary parties and also that, item No.1 of the

suit schedule property is the only ancestral property

and denied that item Nos.2 to 5 are the ancestral joint

family properties and contended that they are self

acquired properties of defendant No.1, which she has

acquired from her parents and the plaintiffs cannot

6

claim any share in item Nos.2 to 5 of the suit schedule

properties and sought for dismissal of the suit.

In the additional written statement filed by

defendant No.2 in respect of item Nos.2 to 5, it is

contended that the suit schedule properties are the

Inam lands granted to defendant No.2 by the

Tahasildar, Lingasugur and thus, contended that the

plaintiffs and defendant No.2 have got half share in

item Nos.2 to 5 and denied the share of rest of the

defendants.

Defendant Nos.3 and 4 filed their written

statement admitting the claim of the plaintiffs that the

suit schedule properties are the ancestral joint family

properties of the plaintiffs and defendants and

contended that defendant Nos.3 and 4 have not given

up their share in the suit schedule properties at the

time of their marriage and contended that they are

7

also entitled for 6/25th share in the suit schedule

properties.

The Trial Court by its judgment and decree

dated 12.12.2012, partly decreed the suit holding that

plaintiffs are entitled for partition and separate

possession of 1/5th share plus 1/5th share (As per

notional partition) in item Nos.1 to 4 and held that the

plaintiffs are entitled for enquiry into mesne profits as

per the provisions of Order 20 Rule 2 of CPC. The

Trial Court further held that defendant Nos.3 and 4

are entitled for partition and separate possession of

1/5th share plus 1/5th share (As per notional partition)

in item Nos.1 to 4 as prayed in the written statement.

9.

Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of

Trial

Court,

defendant

No.2-Ramanna

S/o

Mallappa Jeer preferred RFA No.6002/2013 before this

Court

and this Court,

its

judgment

dated

8

18.06.2013, dismissed the appeal and held that in

view of the observation of the Hon'ble Apex Court in

GANDURI

KOTESHWARAMMA

&

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top