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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 40172

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
E.S.INDIRESH
SMT BHAGYAMMA – Appellant
Versus
SMT SHOBHA – Respondent
RFA 101/2014



HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.161 OF 2014 (PAR)

C/W REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.101 OF 2014 IN RFA No. 161 OF 2014 BETWEEN:

1. MR. RAVI S/O LATE PUTTASWAMI AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/A NO.13/A, 8TH CROSS, SHIVASHAKTHI NAGAR, KONANKUNTAE CROSS, BENGALURU - 560002.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. NATARAJA H.C., ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S AND:

Location: H IGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

1. SMT. SHOBHA D/O LATE PUTTASWAMI AND BAGYAMMA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/A BEERESWARA NAGAR CHUNCHAGATTA MAIN ROAD KONANKUNTE BENGALURU - 560082.

HC-KAR

2. SMT. BHAGYAMMA W/O LATE PUTTASWAMI AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS R/A #13/A, 8TH CROSS SHIVASHAKTHI NAGAR KONANKUNTE CROSS BENGALURU - 560062, 3. SMT. JANAKI W/O BASAVARAJ AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/O ANJANAPURA, NEAR BUS STOP BENGALURU-560079.

4. MR. MAHADEVA S/O LATE PUTTASWAMI AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/A #13/1, 8TH CROSS SHIVASHAKTHI NAGAR KONANKUNTE CROSS BENGALURU - 560062.

5. MR. MAHADEVA S/O LATE PUTTASWAMI AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/A #13/1, 8TH CROSS SHIVASHAKTHI NAGAR KONANKUNTE CROSS BENGALURU - 560062.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAKASH M.H., ADVOCATE FOR R1;

SRI. H.S. PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4;

R5 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

HC-KAR THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION

96, R/W ORDER XLI, RULE 1 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.07.2013 PASSED IN O.S.2611/2010 ON THE FILE OF V-ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION AND MESNE PROFITS.

IN RFA NO. 101 OF 2014 BETWEEN:

1. SMT. BHAGYAMMA W/O LATE PUTTASWAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/A #13/A, 8TH CROSS SHIVASHAKTHI NAGAR KONANKUNTE CROSS BENGALURU - 560062.

2. SMT. JANAKI W/O BASAVARAJ AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/O ANJANAPURA, NEAR BUS STOP BENGALURU-560079.

3. MR. MAHADEVA S/O LATE PUTTASWAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/A #13/A, 8TH CROSS SHIVASHAKTHI NAGAR KONANKUNTE CROSS BENGALURU - 560062.

...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. NATARAJ H.C., ADVOCATE)

HC-KAR AND:

1. SMT. SHOBHA D/O LATE PUTTASWAMAIAH AND BHAGYAMMA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/A BEERESWARA NAGAR CHUNCHAGATTA MAIN ROAD KONANKUNTE BENGALURU - 560082.

2. MR. MAHADEVA S/O LATE PUTTASWAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS R/A #13/A, 8TH CROSS SHIVASHAKTHI NAGAR KONANKUNTE CROSS BENGALURU - 560062.

...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAKASH M.H., ADVOCATE FOR R1;

R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION

96, R/W ORDER XLI, RULE 1 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.07.2013 PASSED IN O.S.2611/2010 ON THE FILE OF V-ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH HC-KAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. RFA No.161 of 2014 is filed by one Ravi, (not a party before the Trial Court) challenging the judgment and decree dated 22.07.2013 passed in O.S. No. 2611 of 2010 on the file of the V Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru, wherein, the Trial Court has decreed the suit of the plaintiff in part.

2. RFA No.101 of 2014 is filed by the defendant No.1 challenging the judgment and decree dated 22.07.2013 passed in O.S. No.2611 of 2010 on the file of the V Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru Court, wherein, the Trial Court has decreed the suit of the plaintiff in part.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties in these appeals shall be referred to in terms of their status and ranking before the trial Court.

HC-KAR

4. The brief facts leading to the suit, as averred in the plaint are that, the plaintiff and defendant Nos.2 to 4 are the children of late Puttaswamaiah and defendant No.1. It is further stated in the plaint that, late Puttaswamaiah had certain ancestral properties and some were sold and thereafter, schedule 'A' property was purchased through the income derived from the Joint Family consisting of plaintiff and defendants. It is also stated that the defendant No

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 Back to top