Trending :
Lawtext
Search
Login / Register
Sign In
HomeJudgement
Scroll Down To Discover
High Court

KAHC010872812010_1

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
Admin
2026-10-22 00:50:11
  • 95
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Issue of Consideration

KAHC010872812010_1

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2013 LawText (KAR) (06) 20

R.F.A. No. 2116 of 2010 c/w R.F.A. No. 2117 of 2010

2013-06-06

N. Kumar, B Sreenivase Gowda

Y. R. Sadashiva Reddy for appellants; O. Shivarama Bhat, M. Narayana Reddy, V. Lakshminarayana, C. Gowrishankar, G. Chandrashekaraiah, H. S. Satish Kumar, B. L. Nandakumar Associates, M. C. Narasimhan Associates, Srinivasa Raghavan for respondents

Smt Ramakka, Purushotham, Ravi, Bhagyamma, Hemavathi, Lalithamma, Yashodamma, Smt Geetha

Smt Thanamma (since deceased by LRs) and others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Suit for partition and separate possession of agricultural land, garden land, and grape vine yard

Remedy Sought

Plaintiffs sought partition and separate possession of ancestral properties; defendants/appellants appealed against the decree granting shares

Filing Reason

Plaintiffs claimed to be members of a Hindu Undivided Family and alleged they were denied their shares in ancestral properties

Previous Decisions

The trial court (I Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore) partly decreed the suits for partition and separate possession on 2010-10-18

Judgment Excerpts

These two appeals are preferred against the common judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.2640/1988 and O.S. No. 5075/2000 decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs. The case of the plaintiffs is, one Arasikuttappa is the propositor. He had two sons by name Chinnanna and Muniyellappa. Muniyellappa had two wives, Smt. Pillamma – the first defendant and Smt. Thanamma – the first plaintiff.

Procedural History

The plaintiffs filed O.S.No.2640/1988 and O.S.No.5075/2000 before the I Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore, seeking partition and separate possession. The trial court passed a common judgment and decree on 2010-10-18 partly decreeing the suits. The defendants/appellants filed Regular First Appeals under Section 96 CPC before the High Court of Karnataka. The High Court heard the appeals and delivered judgment on 2013-06-06.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: 96
  • Hindu Succession Act, 1956:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Tags :
partition ancestral property joint family Hindu Succession Act, 1956 appeal section 96 CPC widow's rights agricultural land

Pay once for this file or subscribe for unlimited downloads

Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows State of Gujarat's Appeals Against Pay-Scale Grant to Private Secretaries. The court upheld the constitutional requirement for salary determinations and rejected blanket pay-scale upgrades. 2026-11-02 00:38:00
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appellant in Rent Control Dispute Due to Lack of Proper Inquiry. Eviction Order Quashed as Assurance from Landlord Not Examined and No Allotment Order Established. 2026-11-02 00:37:48
Categories
Popular Tags
writ petition murder natural justice acquittal compensation burden of proof Land Acquisition limitation Jurisdiction Article 226
Follow Us

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases,...

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute — Upho...

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Suit for Spec...

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Upholds Developer's Challenge to Arbitration Award — ...

High Court Quashes School Tribunal's Order on Employee Reinstatement Due to Procedural Irr...

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction and Death Sentence in POCSO Case Due to Credible Testimon...

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against High Court's Reversal of Trial Court's Decree on Wi...

Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Accused in IPC Sections 376, 420, 493, 494, and 495 Case...

Supreme Court Restores Appellate Tribunal's Order on Tariff Determination Due to Breach of...

Supreme Court Upholds Appellant's Challenge to High Court Orders in Civil Appeal — Legal...

Lost Your Password?