Karnataka High Court
Hanmanthraya S/O Goneppa Namba vs Kumari Devamma D/O Mallappa on 16 August, 2021
Author: Dr. H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL No.7037/2010
BETWEEN:
1. HANMANTHRAYA S/O GONEPPA NAMBA
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O HASNAPUR, TQ.SHORAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA SINCE DECEASED BY LRS.,
1A) SMT. GANGAMMA W/O HANMANTHRAYA
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O HASNAPUR, TQ.SHORAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
1B) SMT.SIDDAMMA W/O JAGADISH MALI PATIL
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O DARIYAPUR, TQ.SHORAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
1C) SRI.DODDA GONEPPA S/O LATE HANMANTHRAYA
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O HASNAPUR, TQ. SHORAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
1D) SRI.SANNA GONEPPA S/O LATE HANMANTHRAYA
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O HASNAPUR, TQ. SHORAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
1E) SMT.RAMAMMA D/O LATE HANMANTHRAYA
AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD
R/O HASNAPUR, TQ.SHORAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
RSA No.7037/2010
2
2. SRI.DANDAPPA S/O GONEPPA NAMBA
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O HASNAPUR, TQ. SHORAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
3. SRI.SIDDAPPA S/O GONEPPA NAMBA
AGE: 42 YEARS OCC: GOVT.SERVANT KLE SOCIETY
POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, CHIKODI
TALUK CHIKODI, DIST. BELGAUM.
4. SRI.BHIMARAYA S/O GONEPPA NAMBA
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE
R/O HASNAPUR, TQ.SHORAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
5. SRI.JAGADISH S/O GONEPPA NAMBA
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE
R/O HASNAPUR, TQ.SHORAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
6. SRI.NAGARAJ S/O GONEPPA NAMBA
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE
R/O HASNAPUR, TQ.SHORAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
7. SRI.DEVARAJ S/O GONEPPA NAMBA
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O HASNAPUR, TQ. SHORAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
8. SMT.MALAMMA W/O GONEPPA NAMBA
AGE: 76 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O HASNAPUR, TQ.SHORAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI S.S.MAMADAPUR AND SRI S.V.BIRADAR, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. KUMARI DEVAMMA D/O MALLAPPA
AGE: 19 YEARS, R/O KYANAL, TQ.SHAHAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
2. KUMAR MALLIKARJUN S/O MALLAPPA
AGE: 17 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.2 MINOR
RSA No.7037/2010
3
REP. BY HIS NEXT FRIEND THEIR REAL FATHER
MALLAPPA S/O YENKAPPA GIDAKAI
AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE
R/O KYANAL, TQ. SHAHAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
3. SMT.GURUSIDDAMMA W/O BASANNA BUDUR
AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O HASNAPUR, TQ.SHORAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
4. SMT.SHARNAMMA W/O AYYAPPA
AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD & AGRICULTURE
R/O ANSUGUR, TQ.SHAHAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
5. SMT. HANMAWWA W/O BALAPPA
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD
R/O BONAL DODDI
TQ. SHAHAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
6. SMT. DEVEKAMMA W/O HAYYALAPPA
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD & AGRICULTURE
R/O CHATNALLI, TQ. SHAHAPUR
DIST. GULBARGA-585 101
... RESPONDENTS
(RESPONDENT NOS.1, 2, 4, 5 AND 6 SERVED;
R3-APPEAL ABATED V/O DATED 07.01.2020)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
100 OF CPC, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 17.11.2009 PASSED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER FAST
TRACK COURT-I, YADGIR IN RA NO.11/2008 CONFIRMING THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 04.02.2008 PASSED BY THE CIVIL
JUDGE (SR.DN.), SHORAPUR IN O.S.NO.335/2004.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THROUGH
PHYSICAL/VIDEO CONFERENCING HEARING, THIS DAY THE COURT
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RSA No.7037/2010
4
JUDGMENT
The appellants are defendant Nos.1(a) to 1(e) and
defendant Nos.2 to 8 in the trial Court. The present
respondent No.1 and 2 were the plaintiffs in the trial Court
who had filed the original suit in O.S.No.335/2004 for relief
of partition and separate possession. Apart from these
parties, there were defendant Nos.9 to 12 who were
arrayed as respondent No.3 to 6 in the present appeal. The
suit in the trial Court came to be decreed allotting different
shares for different parties including 1/10th share to the
present respondent No.3 who was a defendant No.9 in the
trial Court.
Aggrieved by the same, the present appellants
who were defendant Nos.1(a) to 1(e) and defendant Nos.2
to 8 filed regular appeal before the first appellate Court in
R.A.No.11/2008. After contest the said appeal came to be
dismissed by the judgment of the first appellate Court
dated 17.11.2009. Aggrieved by the same, the present
appeal has been filed.
RSA No.7037/2010
2. The death of defendant No.9 who is the present
respondent No.3 is reported. However considering the fact
that in spite of granting sufficient opportunity, the
appellants could not take necessary steps to bring the legal
representatives of deceased respondent No.3 on record,
the appeal against the said respondent No.3 was abated
vide order dated 07.01.2020.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants who is
physically present submits that in view of the fact that the
appeal has become abated as against respondent No.3
who is a proper and necessary party in the appeal, the
present appeal is not maintainable.
4. In view of the above submission and in view of
abatement of appeal as against the sharer of the property
who is respondent No.3 herein, the appeal stands disposed
of as not maintainable.
Sd/-
JUDGE
VNR
