IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 505 OF 2024 (DEC/PAR)

BETWEEN:

1. SMT. RUKKAMMA W/O. B. SHAMANNA REDDY, SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS., VENKATASWAMY, S/O. LATE B. SHAMANNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, 2. MANJULA D/O. LATE B. SHAMANNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 3. BABU REDDY S/O. LATE B. SHAMANNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, Digitally signed by

4. NIRMALA AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH D/O. LATE B. SHAMANNA REDDY, COURT OF KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, 5. SRINIVASA S/O. LATE B. SHAMANNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, 6. SRIDHARA S/O. LATE B. SHAMANNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, NO.1 TO 6 ARE R/ AT DODDAKANNAHALLI CARMELARAM POST, SARJAPURA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 035.

…APPELLANTS (BY SRI.G.PAPI REDDY, SR.COUNSEL FOR SRI. SOMARAJU A., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SMT. NANJAMMA W/O. GOPALA REDDY, D/O. LATE VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, R/AT BOMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, OPP BBMP OFFICE, BEGUR HOBLI AND POST, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE.

2. SRI. VENKATESHWARA. M. N.

S/O. LATE D. MUNIREDDY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT DODDAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, CARMALRAM POST, SARJAPURA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 035.

3. SMT. VANITHA W/O. LATE N. RAMAIAH, D/O. D. MUNIREDDY, R/AT KONEPPANA AGRAHARA, ELECTRONIC CITY POST, BANGALORE-560 100.

4. SMT. MANJULA W/O. SRI. GOPAL, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT NO. 15, UDAYAKUMAR HOUSE, 16TH MAIN, TAVAREKERE ROAD, BTM FIRST STAGE, BANGALORE.

5. SRI. VENKATARAMANAPPA S/O. MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT NO. 156, KATHALIPALYA, KORAMANGALA, 6TH BLOCK, BANGALORE-560 095.

6. SRI. NAGARAJ S/O. MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO. 156, KATHALIPALYA, KORAMANGALA, 6TH BLOCK, BANGALORE-560 095.

7. SRI. JAGADISH. M. G.

S/O. GANGADHAR, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT NO. 5, IN SY. NO. 83/2B, NEAR WIPRO CORPORATE OFFICE, CARMALARAM POST, SARJAPURA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 035.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.V.B.SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R-5;

SRI.P.K.SHRIKARA, ADVOCATE FOR C/R-7)

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 04.12.2023 PASSED IN OS NO.6707/2013 ON THE FILE OF XX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND PARTITION.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

ORAL JUDGMENT

The captioned appeal is by the unsuccessful plaintiff assailing the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S. No. 6707/2013, wherein plaintiff's suit seeking relief of partition and separate possession is dismissed as barred by limitation and also barred by principles of constructive res judicata.

2) For the sake of brevity the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Trial Court.

3) The family tree of the parties is extracted as under:

GENELOGICAL TREE Venkatappa @ Pillaiah (late)

1. Munireddy (late) 2.Nanjamma, (daughter) 3. Rukkamma (daughter)

aged 73 years aged 71 years Venkateswara (son) Vanitha, daughter Manjula (daughter)

aged 42 years aged 40 years aged 38 years

4) The plaintiff–Rukkamma, daughter of late Venkatappa, instituted the present suit for partition asserting that the suit schedule property forms part of the joint family ancestral estate. It is her specific case that though defendant Nos.3 and 4 had earlier instituted a suit for partition in O.S.No.911/2005, wherein the present plaintiff was impleaded as a co-plaintiff, the suit schedule property was inadvertently omitted from the said proceedings. The plaintiff has pleaded that during the first week of July 2013, defendant No.7 approached the suit land and asserted ownership over an extent of 3 guntas, claiming to have purchased the same from defendant No.6. Alarmed by this assertion, the plaintiff approached the competent authority, secured certified copies of documents, and discovered that defendant No.6 had executed a registered sale deed dated 07.04.2006 in respect of land bearing Sy.No.83/2B. Upon further enqu