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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 38693

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
V SRISHANANDA
PUTTASWAMY GOWDA – Appellant
Versus
SMT. MANCHAMMA – Respondent


ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard Sri B.S. Nagaraj, learned counsel for the appellants in RFA No.1921/2005 and for respondent No.10 in RFA No.1118/2006 and Sri Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 5 in RFA No.1921/2005 and respondent Nos.1, 3 to 6 in RFA No.1118/2006.

2. RFA No.1921/2005 is filed by defendant Nos.2 to 4 and RFA No.1118/2006 is filed by defendant No.5, challenging the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.139/1997, on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) and JMFC., Srirangapatna.

3. Parties are referred to as plaintiffs and defendants for the sake of convenience as per their original ranking before the trial Court.

4. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present appeal are as under.

A suit for partition and separate possession came to be filed in O.S.No.139/1997 in respect of the following properties (hereinafter referred to as suit properties):

SCHEDULE

Properties situated at Honaganahalli Village, Pandavapura Taluk:-

1. Land bearing Sy.No.13, extent 0-34 acres bounded on the East Land of Marigowda, West-Land of Laxmegowda, North-Land of Papegowda, South-Land of Ningegowda:

Following lands and House Situated at Chinakurali Village, Pa

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