DECREE

DT.9.9.2005

PASSED

IN

O.S.NO.215/95 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE

(SR.DN),

BANGALORE

RURAL

DIST.,

BANGALORE,

DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE

POSSESSION.

4

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,

THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

These two appeals are arising out of a common

judgment passed by the II Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dvn),

Bengaluru

Rural

District,

Bengaluru,

pertaining

to

O.S.Nos.174/1995 and 215/1995.

2.

Brief facts necessary for the disposal of these

two appeals as is borne from the records are as under:

One Narayana Reddy and Nagappa Reddy purchased

property in Sy.No.124 of Dodda Kannalli village, Varthur

Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, Bengaluru District from its

erstwhile owner Sri Papanna Chari S/o Thomasappa.

3.

The boundaries of property in Sy.No.124 of

Dodda Kannalli village, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru South

Taluk reads as under:

East by

:

Kaka Thimmaiah, Annayya Reddy's

Lands and Gramathana;

West by

:

Ramaia H, Nyathappa,

5

Thomsachar's lands;

North by

:

Gramathana and

South by

:

Road

4.

The said sale deed came to be registered on

08.07.1953

before

the

Sub-Registrar.

Thereafter,

Narayana Reddy died and his wife Lakshmamma and his

daughter Rathna filed a suit for partition in the year 1995

seeking their half share in the property against the wife

and children of Sri Nagappa Reddy.

5.

Earlier to filing of the said suit for partition,

O.S.No.174/1995 was filed by K.N.Sananda Ganesh S/o

Late Nagappa Reddy stating that the suit schedule

property in O.S.No.215/1995 is the absolute property of

Nagappa Reddy by virtue of an agreement entered into on

30.01.1980 by paying Rs.30,000./- as the consideration

and Narayana Reddy has relinquished all his share in the

suit property to Sri Nagappa Reddy.

6

6.

While Laskhmamma and Rathna denied the

plaint averments in O.S.No.174/1995, the wife and

children of Nagappa Reddy denied the plaint averments in

O.S.No.215/1995 maintaining that the suit schedule

property in O.S.No.215/1995 is the absolute property of

Nagappa Reddy by virtue of partition that has taken place

in the year 1960 and subsequent revenue entries being

transferred on to the names of wife and children of

Nagappa Reddy and thus sought for dismissal of the suit.

7.

Based on the rival contentions of the parties in

both the suits, the learned Trial Judge raised the following

issues:

"1.

Whether the defendants 1 to 4 prove that there

was a partition of family properties between K.T.

Narayana Reddy and K.T. Nagappa Reddy in the

year 1960?

2.

Whether the defendants No.1 to 4 further prove

that the suit property was given to the share of

K.T. Nagappa Reddy at the partition of the year

1960?

7

3.

Whether the defendants No.1 to 4 prove that the

husband of plaintiff No.1 has represented that

the suit property should be enjoyed by K.T.

Nagappa Reddy exclusively for himself and

thereby the husband of 1^st plaintiff lost his right

over the suit property?

4.

Whether the plaintiffs prove that they are entitled

to half share in the suit property?

5.

Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to decree

prayed for?

6.

What decree or order?"

8.

Both the suits were tried separately, however,

judgment in both the suits came to be rendered by a

common judgment which is impugned in these two

appeals.

9. In order to prove the case of the parties in

O.S.No.174/1995, the plaintiff K.N.Sananda Ganesha one

of the sons of Nagappa Reddy examined himself as P.W.1.

8

He reiterated the contents of the plaint in his examination

in chief and in his further examination, he has stated that

since his father and his uncle (Nagappa Reddy and

Narayana Reddy) had purchased the property jointly,

however his father was alone enjoyed the property in

exclusion to his uncle. He has further stated that his uncle

was a contractor and his father possessed properties other

than the suit property. It is also stated by him, that

earlier to 1953 there was a oral partition between his

father and uncle. In the