Defendant No.1 challenged the first Appellate Court's remand of a partition suit over one acre of granted land, where the trial Court had dismissed the suit relying on an unregistered palupatti recording unequal partition excluding a third son. The High Court held the remand for proper appreciation of evidence was correct and dismissed the appeal.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:910 MSA No. 79 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO.79 OF 2023 (RO)
BETWEEN:
SRI. V. RANGAPPA S/O JAVAREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O VALAGERAHALLI VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT- 573 202.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI NARASIMHA MURTHY G.V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
ALL R/O VALAGERAHALLI VILLAGE, BAGUR HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT- 573 202.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI ANIL KUMAR R., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3)
THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1 (U) R/W SEC. 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.02.2023 PASSED IN RA.NO.41/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT CHANNARAYAPATNA ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 12.02.2020 PASSED IN OS.NO.756/2013 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHANNARAYAPATNA, DISMISSING THE SUIT THE MATTER IS REMANDED BACK TO THE TRIAL COURT FOR THE PURPOSE OF FRESH ADJUDICATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This appeal is filed by defendant No.1 challenging
the judgment and decree dated 01.02.2023 passed in R.A.No.41/2020 by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Channarayapatna, thereby the First Appellate Court remanded the matter to the trial Court for fresh consideration.
as before the Trial Court for convenience and easy reference.
NC: 2024:KHC:910 MSA No. 79 of 2023
acre of land is the suit property and subject matter of the present case. The said one acre of land was in possession and enjoyment of mother Smt Huchhamma. The mother was expired about one month prior to filing of this suit. Till today the plaintiff and defendants are in joint possession and enjoyment of suit property and plaintiff has 1/3rd share in the same.
judgment and decree passed by the trial Court before the first Appellate Court. The first Appellate Court has
observed that what Ex.D.8-palupatti relied on by the defendants is not a registered document. Further more, according to the said Ex.D.8-palupatti, there was unequal partition and third son is excluded. Furthermore, in the said palupatti, the appellant (defendant No.1) was given major share of 2 acres of land out of total 4 acres of land.
Therefore, the first Appellate Court has remanded the matter to the trial Court for fresh consideration with a direction to appreciate the evidence on record on all the issues and accordingly, remanded the matter.
facts and circumstance on record correctly. The trial Court has just swayed away by Ex.D.8-palupatti by forming an opinion that there is already partition deed and dismissed the suit. But upon considering the same, the said Ex.D.8palupatti is not a registered document. Furthermore, third
son is excluded from the said palupatti. The appellant (defendant No.1) was given major share of 2 acres of land
by virtue of said Ex.D8-palupatti. Why such major share is given excluding third son, even though, he is entitled for share in the property is not explained in the palupatti. With all these observations, the first Appellate Court has rightly come to the conclusion that proper appreciation of evidence is required and accordingly, remanded the matter to the trial Court. It is the observation made by the first Appellate Court that there is no equal share in the property of the family and defendant No.1 has played a prominent role and was successful in getting major share in the property.
and circumstances on record, the first Appellate Court is correct in remanding the matter to the trial Court for fresh consideration, in accordance with law, after proper appreciation of evidence on record. Therefore, the appeal is found to be devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.
NC: 2024:KHC:910 MSA No. 79 of 2023
Accordingly, appeal is dismissed .
In view of dismissal of the appeal, I.A.No.2/2023
does not survive for consideration and it is disposed of.
Sd/JUDGE
PB
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the first Appellate Court rightly remanded the suit for partition to the trial Court for fresh consideration despite Ex.D.8 palupatti evidencing a family partition?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri. V. Rangappa S/o Javaregowda
Smt. Gowramma W/o Chikkegowda
Smt. Rukmini D/o Chikkegowda
Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
