Back
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
H.P. Sandesh, J
Rajashekhar – Appellant
Versus
Bhagyamma – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of historical property disputes and family inheritance claims. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. analysis of trial court findings and scope of first appellate court review. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 3. appellate court's duty to evaluate all evidence and legal issues under order 41 rule 1. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. remand order for de novo consideration by the lower appellate court. (Para 17) |
THIS R.S.A. HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
JUDGMENT ON 09.06.2026 THIS DAY, THE COURT
PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CAV JUDGMENT
Heard learned counsel for the appellants. The respondent Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 7(a), 10, 14, 18, 21, 24, 25, 26, 28 and 29 are served and unrepresented. Vide order dated 05.11.2013, notice to respondent Nos.9, 13, 15 to 17, 19, 20, 22, 23 and 27 is dispensed with and notice to respondent Nos.5, 6, 8, 11, 12 is held sufficient and vide order dated 17.03.2014 service of notice to respondent No.7(b) is held sufficient.
2. This second appeal is filed against concurrent finding of the Trial Court in dismissing the suit in O.S.No.1258/1989 and confirming the same in R.A.No.89/2003 and prayed this Court
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
