Defendants appealed a first appellate court's confirmation of partial decreed partition of joint family properties, arguing defendant No.1 bore plaintiffs' marriage expenses from family assets. The High Court found no illegality or perversity, held no substantial question of law arose, and dismissed the appeal at admission stage.
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 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1058 OF 2023 (PAR/DEC)
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: High Court of Karnataka
ALL ARE RESIDING AT KADALE RANGAMMANA BEEDI, T. NARSIPURA TOWN-577124.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SATISHCHANDRA R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES 2(a) IS THE HUSBAND AND 2(b) TO 2(f) ARE THE CHILDREN OF DECEASED RESPONDENT NO.2
ALL RESPONDENTS NO.1, 2(a) TO 2(f) AND 3 ARE RESIDING AT KADALE RANGAMMARA BEEDI, T. NARASIPUR TOWN-571124.
…RESPONDENTS
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 05TH APRIL, 2023 PASSED IN REGULAR APPEAL NO.15 OF 2021 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT T.N.PURA MYSORE PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 03RD MARCH, 2021 PASSED IN ORIGINAL SUIT NO.35 OF 2010 ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., T.NARASIPURA.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the defendants, challenging the judgment and decree dated 05.04.2023 passed in RA No.15 of 2021 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, T. Narasipura, Mysore, dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment and decree dated 03.03.2021 passed in OS No.35 of 2010 on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, T.Narasipura, decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs in part.
plaintiffs claim to be the children of Ramegowda, and Nanjamma, and defendants are the brother and children of the siblings of the plaintiff. It is the case of the plaintiffs that, the suit schedule properties are the joint family properties of their father-Ramegowda and therefore, the plaintiffs claimed share in the suit schedule properties by filing a suit in OS No.35 of 2010 on the file of the Trial Court, seeking relief of partition and separate possession of their 1/5th share each in the suit schedule properties.
NC: 2024:KHC:38965 RSA No. 1058 of 2023
passed by the Courts below the defendants/appellants have preferred this Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of CPC.
recorded by the both the courts below. It is not in dispute that, the plaintiffs and defendant No.1 as well as one Siddappa, (husband of defendant No.2 and father of defendant Nos.3 and 4) were the children of the late Ramegowda and Nanjamma. There is no dispute with regards to relationship between the parties as well as the suit schedule properties are the joint family properties of
the plaintiffs and defendants. Perusal of the finding recorded by the both the courts below would indicate that, there is no partition in their family and therefore, both the
courts below having taken note of the factual aspects on record, rightly decreed the suit of the plaintiffs. The aspect of Joint family property has been re-appreciated by the First Appellate Court and confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court. Therefore, I do not find material illegality or perversity in the judgments and decree passed by the Courts below and accordingly, the
Regular Second Appeal is liable to be dismissed . Since, the defendants/appellants have not made out grounds for formulation of substantial question of law as required
NC: 2024:KHC:38965 RSA No. 1058 of 2023
under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, the Regular
Second Appeal is dismissed at the Admission stage itself.
SD/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE
SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the courts below erred in decreeing partition of joint family properties despite the defendants' claim of an earlier partition and marriage expenses incurred by defendant No.1.
Whether a substantial question of law arose warranting interference under Section 100 CPC.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
R. Mahadeva @ Pullari
Puttathayamma
Ravi
Pradeep
Mahadevamma
Nanjamma @ Kenchamma (by LRs Puttegowda, Gayathri, Shanthi, Radha, Madhusudan, Manju)
E.S. Indiresh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
