IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.630 OF 2025 (PAR/INJ)

BETWEEN:

1. SMT. MANJULA

W/O LATE KUMAR

D/O LATE B.S. CHANDRASHEKHAR BHATT

AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS

R/A SRI LAKSHMINARASIMHA NILAYA

OUT HOUSE, B.B.STREET

SHIVAMOGGA-577201.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. SUBRAMANYA R., ADVOCATE FOR

SRI. SUMUKHA C.G., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed

1. SMT. NAGARATHNA

by DEVIKA M

W/O RAMACHANDRA

Location: HIGH

D/O LATE B.S.CHANDRASHEKHAR BHATT

COURT OF

AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

KARNATAKA

R/O OPP SHANKAR RICE MILL

T.M. ROAD, KOPPA

CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577126.

2. SMT. JAYALAKSHMI

D/O LATE B.S.CHANDRASHEKHAR BHATT

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

R/O SRI. LAKSHMINARASIMHA NILAYA

OUT HOUSE, B.B.STREET,

SHIVAMOGGA-577201.

3. SMT UMA W/O RAVI D/O LATE B.S.CHANDRASHEKHAR BHATT AGED ABOUT 44 YEASR R/O KOLLURAIAH STREET S.P.M. ROAD SHIVAMOGGA - 577201.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. LEELESH KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3)

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.08.2024 PASSED IN R.A.NO.18/2022 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SHIVAMOGGA., DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.11.2021 PASSED IN O.S.NO.116/2016 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SHIVAMOGGA.

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

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

ORAL JUDGMENT

This matter is listed for admission. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This second appeal is filed against the concurrent finding of the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court.

3. The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiff before the Trial Court is that she is the wife of late B.S.Chandrashekhar Bhatt and all the defendants are the daughters of the plaintiff and she is entitled for 1/5^th share in the suit schedule property and also sought for consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from dispossessing her from RCC house situated in the suit schedule property and alienating the said property in favour of third parties. It is her case that her husband died on 12.08.2012 leaving behind her and also the defendants as her legal heirs. The schedule property consists of main house and an outhouse. The main house being RCC house is in the occupation and possession of the plaintiff. At the same time, the outhouse portion namely house with Mangalore tiled roof is in the occupation of defendant Nos.1 and 3. It is also her case that the defendants by colluding each other have got changed the khatha of RCC house in the name of defendant No.1 and outhouse in the name of defendant No.3. It is also her case that on 13.05.2016, the defendant No.1 along with her son attempted to dispossess her from said RCC house, but she could manage to thwart such attempts with the help of neighbours. It is also the case of the plaintiff that suit schedule property being the self-acquired property of her deceased husband B.S. Chandrashekhar Bhatt is in joint possession and enjoyment of plaintiff and defendants. The suit schedule property remains un-partitioned and the plaintiff is entitled for

1/5^th share.

4. In response to the suit summons, defendant Nos.1 to 4 entered appearance through their respective counsel and filed written statement contesting the suit. In the written statement filed by defendant No.1, the relationship between the parties and the fact that suit schedule property was self- acquired property of deceased B.S. Chandrashekhar Bhatt are admitted. At the same time, she has denied rest of the allegations of plaintiff. Her specific case is that Chandrashekhar Bhatt, who is none other than her father executed registered Will dated 08.04.2009 bequeathing one portion of the suit schedule property which comprises RCC house in her favour and another portion consisting of house in favour of defendant No.3. In addition to that, vario