Dismissed¶¶46

Smt Parvathamma v. Sri Siddappa

Karnataka HC23 Sept 2025RSA/1907/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; RSA No. 1907 of 2023 (PAR/INJ); Justice V Srishananda; decided 23.09.2025; partition suit by daughter dismissed during father's lifetime; O.S.No.756/2010; R.A.No.35/2019; Sec. 100 CPC; appeal dismissed, no costs; liberty to file fresh partition suit if fresh cause of action survives; date of death of common prepositus and opening of succession to be disclosed; defendants not to object on res judicata ground; respondents 1-3 served and unrepresented.

What did the court decide?

The regular second appeal is dismissed. ¶¶41

Smt Parvathamma Vs Sri Siddappa — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:38340 RSA No. 1907 of 2023

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1907 OF 2023 (PAR/INJ)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. PARVATHAMMA W/O AJAIAH AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/O MALLASETTIHALLI VILLAGE DAVNAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. V B SIDDARAMAIAH.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

SRI. SIDDAPPA S/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS

¶13

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

SRI. NAGARAJ S/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

¶15

SMT. RATHNAMMA D/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

¶16

RESPONDENTS ABOVE ARE R/O MALLASETTIHALLI VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 003.

¶17

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:38340 RSA No. 1907 of 2023

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

SRI. GURAPPA S/O THIMMAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/O HONNURU VILLAGE ANAGODU HOBALI - 577 556, DAVNAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT.

¶20

SRI. NAGESH S/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/O PAMMANAHALLI VILLAGE ANAGODU HOBLI - 577 566 DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. RAVI G. SABHAHIT, ADVOCATE FOR R4 AND R5; R1, R2, AND R3 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶23

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.06.2023 PASSED IN RA NO.35/2019 ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., DAVANAGERE., DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 10.04.2018 PASSED IN OS NO.756/2010 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE, DAVANAGERE.

¶24

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

¶26

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶27

Heard Sri. V.B. Siddaramaiah, learned counsel for the

¶28

appellant and Sri. Ravi G. Sabahit, learned counsel for respondents No.4 and 5.

¶29

¶30

NC: 2025:KHC:38340 RSA No. 1907 of 2023

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

Unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant in the

¶33

second appeal. Their suit for partition in O.S.No.756/2010 came to be dismissed confirmed in R.A.No.35/2019 before the First Appellate Court on the ground that the plaintiff being the daughter cannot maintain the suit during the lifetime of the father.

¶34

Sri. V.B. Siddaramaiah, learned counsel for the appellant challenging the validity of the judgment strenuously contended that there is a mistake on the part of the plaintiff in not disclosing the date of death of the grand father and suit properties are ancestral properties and father of the plaintiff has married for the second time and already alienated two properties and therefore, a fresh suit is permitted to be filed by the plaintiff giving out the necessary details as to the date of death of common prepositus and when the succession opened.

¶35