IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 799 OF 2013 (PAR )

BETWEEN:

1. ANANTHAMMA W/O RAMAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, HOUSEWIFE, R/O. VALSE, THALAK HOBLI, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, PIN CODE NO: 577 522.

2. JAYALAKSHMI W/O THIPPA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, HOUSEWIFE, R/O VALSE, THALAK HOBLI, Digitally signed by CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHAYA S A Location: H IGH CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, COURT OF KARNATAKA PIN CODE NO: 577 522.

…APPELLANTS (BY SRI. H. KANTHARAJ, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. RAVI H. K., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THIMMAREDDY S/O LATE KOKKALA MUDALAGIRIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, AGRICULTURISWT, R/O HANUMANTHANAHALLI, THALAK HOBLI, CHALLAKERE TALUK, PIN CODE NO: 577 522

2. RANGAMMA SINCE LATE REPRESENTED BY LRS WHO ARE APPELLANTS AND RESPONDENT NO.1 HEREIN …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SUBASH REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R1 R2 - SD., V/O DTD. 27.02.2026 FOR R1 TREATED AS LRS OF DEAD R2)

THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE DTD. 29.01.2013 PASSED IN R.A.NO.45/2012 & R.A.NO.46/2012 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE (FAST TRACK COURT, CHITRADURGA, ALLOWING R.A.45/2012 AND DISMISSING R.A.46/2012 FILED AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DTD. 24.05.2012 PASSED IN OS.NO.7/2011 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CHALLAKERE. TRAIL COURT DECREED THE SUIT. APPELLATE COURT ALLOWED R.A.45/2012 AND DISMISSED R.A.46/2012. SUIT FOR DECLARATION, PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

ORAL JUDGMENT

This Regular Second Appeal is preferred by the plaintiffs assailing the judgment and decree dated 29.01.2013 in R.A.No.45/2012 and R.A.No.46/2012 on the file of the Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Chitradurga (hereinafter termed as 'First Appellate Court'), modifying the judgment and decree dated 24.05.2012 in O.S.No.7/2011 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Challakere (hereinafter termed as 'Trial Court'), decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs and the counter claim filed by the defendants.

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

3. The relevant facts for adjudication of this appeal are that, the plaintiffs and defendant No.1 are the children of Kokkala Mudalagiriyappa and defendant No.2-wife. It is stated in the plaint that one of the brothers of the plaintiffs– Gurumurthy, and his wife died without leaving behind any children. Therefore, the plaintiffs have sought partition of the suit schedule properties, stating that the scheduled properties are the joint family properties of their father-Kokkala Mudalagiriyappa. Accordingly, they sought for partition in suit schedule property by filing the suit in O.S.No.7/2011 before the Trial Court.

4. After service of notice, defendants entered appearance and filed detailed written statement denying the averments made in the suit.

5. It is the case of the defendant No.1 that 'B'

schedule property is not the joint family property of the plaintiffs and also stated that the suit 'A' schedule property is the ancestral property of the father of the plaintiffs and defendant No.1. It is further stated that, after the death of the father-Kokkala Mudalagiriyappa, the defendants and another son-Gurumurthy were in possession of the 'A' schedule property and as such, the said Gurumurthy had filed a suit for partition in O.S.No.117/2006 against the defendants, in collusion with defendant No.2, wherein defendant No.2 has sought for 1/3^rd share in the suit 'A' schedule property. It is also stated that, in the said suit, the competent Court decreed the suit, holding that defendant No.1 is entitled for 1/3^rd share in the suit schedule property. In view of the same, defendant No.1, being only surviving son of defendant No.2 and therefore, it is contended by defendant No.1 that he is entitled for 1/2 share