The High Court rejected an appeal filed by a subsequent purchaser challenging a partition decree. It held the appellant must file as an objector in final decree proceedings, not via appeal, and dismissed the application for leave to appeal.
Appeal and all pending applications dismissed; liberty granted to file objections in final decree proceedings.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF JULY, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1111 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
Sri.D.Ramadas S/o late Buddanna, Aged about 54 years, #733/2, Vidyapeeta Road, Kengeri, Bangalore-560 060.
…Appellant
(By Sri.H.T.Jagannatha, Advocate)
AND:
Krishnamurthy.D Since dead by LRs
2
The Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 Are R/at #554/A, Vidyapeeta Road, Kengeri, Bangalore-560 060.
Respondent Nos. 5 to 7 Are R/of #1648, 5th Main, Anjaneya Temple Road, Opp. COD Quarters, K.S.Town, Bangalore-560 060.
3
4
…Respondents
This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 read with Order XLI Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree dated 11.02.2013 passed in OS.No.3687/2008 on the file of the XXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, decreeing the suit for partition and separate possession.
This appeal coming on for orders, this day, S.SUJATHA J., delivered the following:
5
J U D G M E N T
This appeal is filed by Sri.D.Ramadas claiming to be the subsequent purchaser of the portion of the suit schedule property seeking permission to challenge the judgment and decree dated 11.02.2013 passed in O.S No.3687/2008 on the file of XXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-7).
6
Accordingly, appeal and all pending applications are dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
UN
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a subsequent purchaser of suit property is permitted to file an appeal against a final decree in partition proceedings.
Whether the appellant should be permitted to file objections in pending final decree proceedings instead.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Sri. D. Ramadas
Smt. Radha
Ashwini. K
Harshitha. K
Smt. Hanumakka
Smt. Nagarathna
S. SUJATHA
E.S. INDIRESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
