Appellants challenged the dismissal of their plaint on merits after admitting a prior partition deed amongst family members, holding the trial court was right in dismissing the suit under the Hindu Succession Act.
Appeal on merits is dismissed. No costs.
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.
RFA No. 128/2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 128 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by YASHODHA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE EAST TALUK …APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI. M. MADHUSUDHAN, ADVOCATE FOR SHRI. V. VISHWANATH SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
RFA No. 128/2017
PARTIES AT SL. NO. 1 TO 4 ARE R/AT VINAYAKANAGAR HAGDUR VILLAGE K.R.PURAM HOBLI BANGALORE EAST TALUK
B) MR. V. RAJAGOPAL S/O G. VELAPPA NAIDU
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS …RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI. N.K. MALLIKARJUN, ADVOCATE FOR SHRI. A. SAMPATH, ADVOCATE)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 R/W ORDER 41 OF CPC., AGAINST THE ORDER ON IA.NO.II DATED 07.04.2016 PASSED IN OS.NO.248/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU (R) DIST., BENGALURU, ALLOWING THE IA NO.II FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11(d) OF CPC.
RFA No. 128/2017
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR J. , DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal by the plaintiffs is directed against the order dated 07.04.2016 in O.S.No.248/2014, passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, allowing I.A.No.II filed by defendants No.1 to 4 under Order VII Rule 11(d) of CPC and rejecting the plaint.
have admitted before the trial Court that there was a partition between the family members through a registered partition deed dated 13.03.2002. The learned trial Judge has rightly allowed the IA and rejected the plaint by holding
RFA No. 128/2017
that plaintiffs are not entitled to any share in the property in view of provision contained in Section 6(a) of the amended Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
No costs.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
YN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a plaint is maintainable despite an admitted prior partition deed under Section 6(a) of the amended Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
SMT. H.B. SUNANDAMMA
SMT H.B. BHARATHI
SRI. H.B. NAGARAJ
SRI. H.B. KRISHNA MURTHY
SRI. H.B. ASWATHANARAYANA
SRI. H.N. SATISH
P.S.DINESH KUMAR
G BASAVARAJA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
