IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100197 OF 2019 (PAR/POS)

BETWEEN:

1. KARABASAPPA S/O DODDANINGAPPA KURI AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O: CHIKKOPPA SK UDACHAMNAGAR TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

2. BALAPPA S/O KARABASAPPA KURI AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTRUE R/O: CHIKKOPPA SK UDACHAMNAGAR TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

3. NINGAPPA S/O KARABASAPPA KURI AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: NIL R/O: CHIKKOPPA SK UDACHAMNAGAR TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B 4. SMT. BASAVVA W/O KARABASAPPA KURI SHELAR Location: High AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD Court of Karnataka, R/O: CHIKKOPPA SK UDACHAMNAGAR Dharwad Bench TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

…APPELLANTS (BY SRI. B.V SOMAPUR AND SMT. NANDINI B SOMAPUR, ADVS)

AND:

1. SMT. KASTUREVVA W/O AMBANNA KARIKATTI AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O: SINDOGI, TQ: SAVADATTI DIST: BELAGAVI.

2. SMT. NEELAVVA @ ROOPA W/O SHIVAPPA ULLIGERI AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O: GOVANAKOPPA, TQ & DIST: DHARWAD.

3. SMT. RATNAVVA @ CHAITRA W/O MANJUNATH ULLIGERI AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD R/O: GOVANAKOPPA, TQ & DIST: DHARWAD.

4. SMT. GEETA D/O DYAMANNA KURI AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD R/O: CHIKKOPPA, NOW AT C/O. KALLAPPA DIVATAGI OF NAVALGUND TQ: NAVALGUND, DIST: DHARWAD.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SHAILA BELLIKATTI, ADV FOR R1 TO R4)

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.01.2019 PASSED IN O.S.NO.20/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, RAMDURG, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAD DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER :

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)

This regular first appeal is filed by the defendants/appellants challenging the judgment and preliminary decree dated 29.01.2019 passed in O.S.No.20/2014 by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Ramdurg.

2. For convenience, the parties are referred to, as per their ranking before the trial court. The appellants were defendants No.1 to 4 and respondents No.1 to 4 were the plaintiffs, and the other respondents were the other defendants.

3. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this regular first appeal are as under:

The plaintiffs filed the suit against the defendants for the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties. It is the case of the plaintiffs that, defendant No.1 was the original propositus. He had a wife, by the name, Gangawwa, who passed away 20 years back.

The Plaintiffs No.1 to 3 are the daughters of defendant No.1, and plaintiff No.4 is the daughter-in-law of defendant No.1. It is the case of the plaintiffs that, the suit schedule properties are the ancestral and joint family properties of the plaintiffs and the defendants. The plaintiffs and the defendants are the members of the Hindu undivided joint family and no partition is effected between the plaintiffs and defendant No.1. It is stated that, the suit item No.1 property is purchased by defendant No.1 out of the income from the ancestral property. Therefore, the said property is also the joint family property. Defendant No.1 is addicted to bad habits and tried to dispose of the suit schedule properties. Defendant No.1 has executed a registered gift deed dated 07.06.2014 in favour of defendant Nos.2 and 3. It is contended that, defendant No.1 had no right to execute the gift deed in favour of defendant Nos.2 and 3. The gift deed executed by defendant No.1 in favour of defendant Nos.2 and 3 is not binding on the plaintiffs’ share. It is contended that, the plaintiffs demanded for a partition and separate possession. Defendant No.1 refused to effect partition. Hence, a cause of action arose for the plaintiffs to file the