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

2016 Supreme(Kar) 298

H.G.RAMESH, RATHNAKALA
Shakuntala – Appellant
Versus
Basavaraj – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Sri Mallikarjunswamy B. Hiremath
For the Respondents: Sri R.B. Contractor

JUDGMENT :

H.G. Ramesh, J.

1. This first appeal is by the plaintiffs and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 06.08.2012 passed by the Court of First Additional Senior Civil Judge, Hubli, R.F.A. No. 4212/2013 dismissing their suit in O.S.No.119/2008 filed for partition of suit properties and for a declaration that the sale deed dated September 9, 2005 executed by their father (Defendant No.1) in favour of defendant No.4 in respect of the suit land measuring 3 acres 38 guntas was not binding on them. The only other suit property is a house property. The plaintiffs claimed 3/6th share in the suit properties stating that the suit properties were ancestral properties.

2. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants, perused the impugned judgment and the record of the trial Court. The parties are referred to herein as per their ranking before the trial Court.

3. The trial Court, on an appreciation of the evidence on record, has held that the suit properties were individual and separate properties of the plaintiffs’ father defendant No.1, as they were self ac















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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top