Plaintiff appealed a dismissed partition suit claiming coparcenary rights in properties settled absolutely in favour of K.T. Koragappa by settlement deed. The High Court held the settled property became absolute property of the settlee and no coparcenary right arose in the plaintiff; the appeal was dismissed.
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 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1027 OF 2017 (INJ)
BETWEEN:
SRI. SUHAS D S/O B DEVARAJ AGED BOUT 27 YEARS R/AT NO.748/2-8, NELE 4TH MAIN, DWARAKANAGAR CHANDRA LAYOUT, BANGALORE-506 072
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. BRYEN STIENBERG, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. JOSE SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by MALATESH K C
Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SHIMOGA DISTRICT 577 117
R/AT RAVATHKERI, BASRUYR VILLAGE KUNDAPURA TALUK 577 112, UDUPI DISTRICT.
D/O LATE K T KORAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT RAVATHKERI, BASRUR VILLAGE KUNDAPURA TALUK 577 010
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K. G. SADASHIVAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R6; R1 TO R5, R7, R9 ARE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED; VIDE ORDER DATED:27/8/19 NOTICE TO R8 IS HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED: 07.02.2017 PASSED IN OS.NO.30/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KUNDAPURA DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.Byren Stienberg, learned counsel for the
appellant. The unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant in this appeal.
Smt. Rukku Hengsu is by spending the family income of Sri.Manjappa, the husband of Smt. Rukku Hengsu.
Thereafter, Smt. Rukku Hengsu settled the properties in the name of Sri.K.T.Koragappa, her only son under the settlement deed dated 24.08.1948. Sri.K.T.Koragappa, had one son and six daughters, they are the defendant Nos.1,4 to 9 in the present case.
NC: 2024:KHC:31214 RFA No. 1027 of 2017
plaintiff and also prayed for decreeing of the suit, in other words, all these defendants sailed along with the plaintiff.
therefore decree passed in O.S.No.46/2005 culminated in the final decree proceedings in FDP No.9/2012 does not bind the share of the plaintiff and therefore suit of the plaintiff needs to be decreed, for that purpose, he sought for admitting the appeal for further consideration.
consideration the material available on record and specifically has held that the property showing in Ex.P.2 was purchased by Smt.Rukku Hengsu, who in turn had
NC: 2024:KHC:31214 RFA No. 1027 of 2017
settled the property in favor of Sri.K.T.Koragappa vide registered settlement deed.
ORDER
Appeal grounds are meritless. Accordingly, the admission is declined.
This appeal is hereby dismissed .
Sd/(V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE
AKV_List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47_CT:SK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the plaintiff, born after the settlement of properties in favour of K.T. Koragappa, was a coparcener entitled to claim partition of the suit properties.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sri. Suhas D
Sri. B Devaraj
Smt. Sowmya
Smt. Sushma D
Smt. B. Vimala
Smt. Sunitha
V Srishananda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
