IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.149 OF 2025 (PAR)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI. AJAYA D.K., 5S/O K.B. DUSHYANTHRAJ AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.2345

2 STAGE, 4TH MAIN NITTUVALLI NEW EXTENSION DAVANAGERE CITY-577001 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. UMESH MOOLIMANI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S.V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed

1. SRI. K.S. DUSHYANTHRAJ by DEVIKA M S/O SOMASHEKHARAPPA Location: HIGH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS COURT OF KARNATAKA

2. SRI. K. BHEEMAPPA S/O K. SHIVALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS AGRICULTURIST THE RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 ARE RESIDENTS OF SHIRAMAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577005.

3. SMT. GIRIJAMMA W/O MURIGENDRAPPA MAHALINGAPPARA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/O KANDAGAL VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK-577514 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. 4. KIRAN KUMAR D.K., AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/O SHIRAMAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK-577005 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.09.2024 PASSED IN R.A.NO158/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DEVANAGERE, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 12.06.2023 PASSED IN O.S.NO.25/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DAVANAGERE.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. This matter is listed for admission. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.

2. This second appeal is filed against the concurrent finding. The factual matrix of case of the plaintiff before the Trial Court claiming to be the son of 1^st defendant that he is under the care and custody of his mother Smt.Manjula. The suit property fell to the share of the 1^st defendant in a family partition and thereafter, the Khata of the suit property was also changed in the name of the 1^st defendant. The suit schedule property is a joint family property. Further, pleaded that the plaintiff and his mother Manjula had filed a petition seeking maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.PC and the said petition was allowed and granted maintenance of Rs.500/- and Rs.1,000/- in favour of the mother of the plaintiff and plaintiff on 01.06.2011. The defendant in order to avoid right of maintenance only he had created a sale deed in the year 1999 and also contended that a Panchayath was held in the year 2003 and it was only a nominal sale deed and not the sale. When the demand was made to share the property, he did not agree to demand and hence without any other alternative relief, he has filed the suit for the relief of partition and also contend that the sale made is not binding. The defendant No.1 appeared and filed a written statement contending that suit is barred by limitation and admitted the relationship and defendant No.1 already married Smt.Premleela in the year 1993 itself and in the said wedlock, 4^th defendant is born. It is contended that Manjula led a happy marital life and as the 1^st defendant had age old mother, Manjula was not ready to look after his mother and Panchayath was held on 05.01.2003 in the presence of Shivacharya Swamiji of Sanehalli Matha and ended in divorce of defendant No.1 and Manjula, then 1^st defendant filed a petition for Constitution of Conjugal Rights in M.C.No.112/2009 on the file of the Family Court, Davanagere and Smt.Manjula refused to come and join the company of 1^st defendant and he withdrew the petition. It is also his contention that 1^st defendant in order to meet the expenses of the education of his children and also to improve the maize business, sold suit property to his uncle K.Bheemappa for sale consideration amount of Rs.76,000/- on 24.11.1999. It is also his contention that in view of the sale deed executed by the 1^st defendant, 2^nd defendant was in peaceful and enjoyment of the suit property till 29.09.2009 and thereafter,