Disposed

M Vasantha Nayak v. M Srinivasa Nayak

Karnataka HC8 Aug 2023RSA/357/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of a regular second appeal against decrees dismissing an appeal and upholding a decree for possession, allowing the appeal contentions to be raised in a pending partition suit.

What the court decided

AI extract

M Vasantha Nayak Vs M Srinivasa Nayak — Partition | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

NC: 2023:KHC:27912 RSA No. 357 of 2023

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶7

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 357 OF 2023 (POS)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

M. VASANTHA NAYAK S/O RAMANATHA NAYAK AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT H.SEETHARAMA BHAT COMPOUND COURT ROAD, PUTTUR POST, PUTTUR, D.K. – 574 201.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI M.J.ALVA, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SHARANYA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

M. SRINIVASA NAYAK S/O RAMANATHA NAYK AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT H.SEETHARAMA BHAT COMPOUND COURT ROAD, PUTTUR POST, PUTTUR, D.K. – 574 201.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI CHANDRANATH ARIGA K., ADVOCATE FOR C/R)

¶17

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 06.12.2022 PASSED IN R.A.NO.11/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, PUTTUR, TALUK, D.K. DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.03.2021 PASSED IN O.S.NO.191/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, PUTTUR, D.K.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2023:KHC:27912 RSA No. 357 of 2023

¶20

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Heard the appellant’s counsel and also the counsel

¶23

appearing for the respondent.

¶24

The respondent counsel in the previous occasion made the submission that in view of the judgment and decree of the Trial Court and also decree of the First Appellate Court possession is taken and to that effect memo is also filed. The counsel for the appellant would submit that the finding given by the Trial Court as well as the First Appellate Court should not come in the way in disposal of the suit which is filed for the relief of partition. Both the counsels not disputes the fact that suit is pending for the relief of partition before the Trial Court. When such being the circumstances and also counsel appearing for the appellant relies upon the judgment ILR 2014 KAR 1444 regarding nomenclature of the document cannot be looked into, contents of the documents are paramount, and though the document is styled as settlement deed and recital of the documents is nothing but a gift deed and no acceptance.

¶25

¶26

NC: 2023:KHC:27912 RSA No. 357 of 2023

¶27

The said contention is kept open and the parties can raise all grounds which have been urged before the Trial Court as well as the First Appellate Court and while the Trial Court disposing the matter for suit for partition shall not influence with the findings of the Trial Court as well as the First Appellate Court with regard to seeking the relief of partition and only an order has been passed for delivery of possession and decree already been executed by taking the possession in terms of the memo filed before this Court.

¶28

With these observations, the second appeal is disposed

¶29

of.

¶30

All contentions are kept open to the parties to raise the same in a partition suit.

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

¶33

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 57

M Vasantha Nayak v. M Srinivasa Nayak

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

M Vasantha Nayak v. M Srinivasa Nayak

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Saraswathamma Vs Sri Chandrappa

Sri Santosh Kumar L Vs Sri. Gangadhar H

Shivaram Anchan Vs Mrs. Leena

Sri. Gunapala N Vs Sri. a. Harsha v. Rai

Rudramma Shetty Vs Amba Shetty

Venkateshappa Vs Lakshmaiah