SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
,
JEELAKHABI @ MALTAN BI – Appellant
Versus
K.BASHA S/O BANDI IMAM SAB – Respondent
RFA/100139/2017



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 25th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

AND

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.DESAI

RFA NO.100139 OF 2017 (PAR & POS)

BETWEEN

1. JEELAKHABI @ MALTAN BI,

AGED: 37 YEARS,OCC: HOUSEWIFE,

R/O: H.NO.2061, 22ND WARD,

BALLARI BY-PASS ROAD,

SHASTRI NAGAR, HOSAPETE,

DIST: BALLARI-583201.

2. K.SHAMEEM BANU

D/O K. MEHABOOB BASHA,

AGED: 19 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,

R/O: H.NO.2061, 22ND WARD,

BALLARI BY-PASS ROAD,

SHASTRI NAGAR,HOSAPETE,

DIST: BALLARI-583201.

3. K.MOHAMMED AZEEM

S/O K. MEHABOOB BASHA,

AGED: 17 YEARS,OCC: STUDENT,

R/O: H.NO.2061,22ND WARD,

BALLARI BY-PASS ROAD,SHASTRI NAGAR,

HOSAPETE,DIST: BALLARI-583201.

MINOR, REPRESENTED BY

NEXT FRIEND SISTER K.SHAMEEM BANU

D/O K.MEHABOOB BASHA,

: 2

AGED: 19 YEARS,OCC: STUDENT,

R/O: H.NO.2061,22ND WARD,

BALLARI BY-PASS ROAD,SHASTRI NAGAR,

HOSAPETE,DIST: BALLARI-583201.

4 . K.MOHAMMED MAHIL

S/O K. MEHABOOB BASHA,

AGED: 14 YEARS,OCC: STUDENT,

R/O: H.NO.2061,22ND WARD,

BALLARI BY-PASS ROAD,

SHASTRI NAGAR,HOSAPETE,

DIST: BALLARI-583201.

MINOR, REPRESENTED BY

NEXT FRIEND SISTER

K.SHAMEEM BANU D/O K.MEHABOOB BASHA,

AGED: 19 YEARS,OCC: STUDENT,

R/O: H.NO.2061,22ND WARD,

BALLARI BY-PASS ROAD,SHASTRI NAGAR,

HOSAPETE,DIST: BALLARI-583201.

5. K.NUSRATH JAHAN

D/O K. MEHABOOB BASHA,

AGED: 12 YEARS,R/O: H.NO.2061,

22ND WARD,BALLARI BY-PASS ROAD,

SHASTRI NAGAR,HOSAPETE,

DIST: BALLARI-583201.

MINOR, REPRESENTED BY

NEXT FRIEND SISTER

K.SHAMEEM BANU D/O K.MEHABOOB BASHA,

AGED: 19 YEARS,OCC: STUDENT,

R/O: H.NO.2061,22ND WARD,

BALLARI BY-PASS ROAD,SHASTRI NAGAR,

HOSAPETE,DIST: BALLARI-583201.

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. ANANT HEGDE, ADV.)

: 3

AND

1 . K.BASHA S/O BANDI IMAM SAB,

AGED: 35 YEARS,

OCC: TILES EMBEDDING CONTRACTOR,

R/O: 9TH WARD, 1ST CROSS,

SIDDALINGAPPA CHOWKI,HOSAPETE,

DIST: BALLARI-583201.

2 . IQBAL HUSSAIN

S/O BANDI IMAM SAB,

AGED: 32 YEARS,

OCC: TILES EMBEDDING CONTRACTOR,

R/O: 9TH WARD, 1ST CROSS,

SIDDALINGAPPA CHOWKI,

HOSAPETE,DIST: BALLARI-583201.

3. BEGUM W/O BANDI IMAM SAB,

AGED: 55 YEARS, OCC: BEEDI SHOP,

R/O: 9TH WARD, 1ST CROSS,

SIDDALINGAPPA CHOWKI,

HOSAPETE,DIST: BALLARI-583201.

4. BANDI IMAM SAB,

S/O LATE HUSSAIN SAB,

AGED: 62 YEARS, OCC: SECURITY GUARD IN

PRIVATE FIRM, R/O: 9TH WARD, 1ST CROSS,

SIDDALINGAPPA CHOWKI, HOSAPETE,

DIST: BALLARI-583201.

SINCE DIED RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3 ARE

LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF DECEASED RESPONDENT NO.4.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. GOURI SHANKAR H MOT, ADV. FOR R1-R3)

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC. 96 OF CPC., AGAINST

THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 09.09.2016 PASSED IN

: 4

O.S.NO.542/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR

CIVIL

JUDGE

AND

JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE

FIRST

CLASS,

HOSAPETE,

PARTLY

DECREEING

THE

SUIT

FILED

FOR

PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY,

SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Heard the arguments of Sri.Ananth Hegde, learned

counsel appearing for the appellants and Sri.Gouri

Shankar.H.Mot,

learned

counsel

appearing

for

the

respondent Nos.1 to 3.

2. Defendant No.3 is the first appellant. Appellant

Nos. 2 to 5 were not parties in the suit. By judgment

dated 09.09.2016, the Prl. Senior Civil Judge & JMFC,

Hospet decreed the suit, O.S.No.542/2014, filed by

respondent Nos.1 and 2. The third respondent and the

deceased 4th respondent are defendant Nos.1 and 2

respectively in the suit. The suit was for partition and

separate

possession

in

respect

of

three

items

of

properties described in the schedule to the plaint.

: 5

3. The plaintiffs stated that they had equal share in

the suit properties. According to them they are the

members of the joint family. They also contributed

money for purchasing suit properties and construction of

the house. They alleged that d

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top