Karnataka High Court
Saidappa S/O Hanamanthappa Ramji vs Sushilabai W/O Amrut Gunge on 14 June, 2023
Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:970
RSA No. 200004 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 200004 OF 2023 (PAR/POS)
BETWEEN:
SAIDAPPA S/O HANAMANTHAPPA RAMJI
DECEASED BY LR,
MAMATA W/O LATE SAIDAPPA RAMAJI,
AGE : 49 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. MADYAL, TQ : ALAND,
DIST : KALABURAGI - 585 302.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MANVENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
AND:
by SACHIN
Location: HIGH SUSHILABAI W/O AMRUT GUNGE
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AGE : 67 YEARS, OCC : AGRICULTURE,
R/O. DHUTTARGAON, TQ : ALAND - 585 302.
...RESPONDENT
(NOTICE TO RESPONDENT SERVED)
THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF THE CPC, PRAYING TO
ALLOW THE APPEAL AND TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND
DECREE DATED 12.08.2022 PASSED IN R.A. NO.18/2018 BY
THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ALAND, AND ALSO
TO SET ASIDE THE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
22.08.2016 PASSED IN O.S. NO.13/2013 BY THE COURT OF
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:970
RSA No. 200004 of 2023
THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ALAND BY ALLOWING THE
APPEAL AND DISMISS THE SUIT OF THE PLAINTIFF IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
1. The respondent had filed a suit against the
appellant - Saidappa seeking for partition contending that
the suit properties, which were the properties of her
mother was required to be divided and she was entitled to
be granted half a share on the death of her mother on
02.08.2011.
2. The appellant-Saidappa denied this claim and
contended that the house property had not been included
in the suit. He, however did not deny the relationship and
also did not deny the fact that the suit properties came to
their mother through their grand-mother.
3. The Trial Court taking note of this plea came to
the conclusion that both plaintiff and defendant being the
NC: 2023:KHC-K:970
RSA No. 200004 of 2023
children of Gangamma, both of them were entitled to an
equal share and accordingly, decreed the suit.
4. The Appellate Court on re-appreciation of the
evidence concurred with the finding of the Trial Court,
confirmed the judgment and decree of the Trial Court. As
against these concurring judgments, this second appeal
has been preferred.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant contended
that these judgments and decrees of the Courts below
could not be sustained and same were illegal.
6. The defendant specifically stated in his written
statement that the property was purchased on 26.10.1970
from his mother Gangamma and he admitted that she
passed away on 02.08.2011.
7. In view of the fact that the defendant admitted
that the property was purchased by his mother -
Gangamma under a registered sale-deed, on her death
NC: 2023:KHC-K:970
RSA No. 200004 of 2023
intestate, it is obvious that both the plaintiff and defendant
being her only children inherited the property in equal
proportion. The Trial Court was therefore justified in
granting the plaintiff half a share in the properties and
same has been rightly affirmed by the Appellate Court.
8. I find no question of law, muchless a substantial
question of law arising for consideration in this appeal and
the same is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SN
