Dismissed

Smt Narayanamma v. Sri T N Chandraiah

Karnataka HC2 Nov 2022WP/5031/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition under Article 226 sought to quash the civil court's order rejecting the petitioner's application for enhancement of her share in partition proceedings. The petitioner relied on Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma but failed to produce documents proving her birth date. The court disposed of the petition with liberty to file a review and call upon the civil court to reconsider the mat

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with liberty to petitioner to file a review application and call upon the civil court to consider the matter in light of Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma.

Smt Narayanamma Vs Sri T N Chandraiah — Partition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 02^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.5031/2022 (GM-CPC)

¶6

BETWEEN :

¶7

SMT NARAYANAMMA D/O LATE ELE NANJAPPA WIFE OF VENKATASWAMY AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 08, BALAGERE NEAR BUS STOP BALAGERE BENGALURU 560103.

¶8

... PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. FAYAZ SAB B G., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND :

¶11

SRI T N CHANDRAIAH SON OF LATE ELE NANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT THINDLU VILLAGE SARJAPUR HOBLI AND POST ANEKAL TALUK 562125 BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.

¶12

SRI N RAMAIAH

¶13

SON OF LATE ELE NANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT THINDLU VILLAGE SARJAPUR HOBLI AND POST ANEKAL TALUK 562125 BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.

¶14

¶15

SRI RAMACHANDRAPPA SON OF LATE C RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT THINDLU VILLAGE SARJAPUR HOBLI AND POST ANEKAL TALUK 562125 BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT. 4. SRI PAPA RAJU SON OF LATE C RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT THINDLU VILLAGE SARJAPUR HOBLI AND POST ANEKAL TALUK 562125 BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT. 5. SRI CHOWDAPPA SON OF LATE C RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT THINDLU VILLAGE SARJAPUR HOBLI AND POST ANEKAL TALUK 562125 BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT. 6. SMT MARIYAMMA D/O LATE ELE NANJAPPA WIFE OF RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, RESIDING AT THINDELE VILLAGE SARJAPUR HOBLI AND POST ANEKAL TALUK 562125 BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENTS

¶16

(SRI. T.N. CHANDRAIAH - R1, PARTY-IN PERSON(ABSENT)

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH/SET-ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 26.11.2021 PASSED IN APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN FOR ENHANCEMENT OF SHARE OR

¶18

¶19

EQUAL SHARE ON PAR WITH SON IN FDP NO.1/2010 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT ANEKAL VIDE ANNX-A.

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The petitioner's application in FDP No.01/2010 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal (for short, ' the civil Court ') is rejected by the impugned order dated 26.11.2021. The civil Court by this impugned order has not only rejected the petitioner's application for enlargement of shares granted in terms of the preliminary decree confirmed in an appeal by this Court but has also directed drawing up of final decree in terms of the sketch filed by the Commissioner along with his report dated 22.04.2019. The petitioner's application, which is for enlargement of shares based on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma reported in 2020 (9) SCC 1 , is rejected solely on the ground that the petitioner

¶23

¶24

has not produced any documents to show that she was born prior to 1956.

¶25

Sri Fayaz Sab B.G., the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is brought on record in the original proceedings on the demise of Sri.Ele Nanjappa and even as of the date she was brought on record, as is obvious from the preliminary decree, the petitioner was aged 27 years and if this remains indisputable, it would be beyond cavil that the petitioner is born after 1956. The petitioner’s case is that the civil Court has not considered the material on record in arriving at its conclusion that the petitioner has failed to establish that she was born after 1956 or that the preliminary decree must be revisited in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vineeta

¶26

Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma supra.

¶27

¶28

The proceedings are pending from the year 1989 without culmination and if there would be a stay of further proceedings on the grounds now urged, the protraction would only be exaggerated. In the light of the above and because the petitioner contends the material facts are not considered, this Court is of the considered view that the petition must be disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an application for review of the impugned order and calling upon the civil Court to consider the same in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vineeta Sharma v.

¶29

Rakesh Sharma.

¶30

The petition stands disposed of with such liberty.

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

SA/Ct:sr

Smt Narayanamma v. Sri T N Chandraiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Narayanamma v. Sri T N Chandraiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Panchamishree Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Lakshmi Gold Khazaana Pvt. Ltd.

Smt a R Sarvamangalamma Vs Smt G S Sarvamangalamma

Sri. M.N. Ravi Kumar Vs Sri.a.J.Suryanarayana

Venkatachalappa Vs Smt.Ashwathamma

Sri S Ramesha Vs M/S Margadarsi Chits (K) Pvt. Ltd.

Sri.Narayanappa Vs Sri.Muniyappa