Karnataka High Court
Raju vs Siddalingamama on 2 November, 2023
Bench: H.P.Sandesh, Ramachandra D. Huddar
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:12768-DB
RFA No. 100088 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100088 OF 2015 (PAR/POS)
BETWEEN:
1. RAJU S/O. SIDDAPPA YATTINAHALLI,
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER
HANGODI COMPLEX, HALAGERI ROAD,
RANEBENNUR, DISTRICT HAVERI - 581115.
2. SHIVAPPA S/O. SIDDAPPA YATTINAHALLI,
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER,
R/O: RAVINAGAR, GOKUL ROAD,
HUBBALI, DISTRICT DHARWAD.
3. VEERESH S/O. SIDDAPPA YATTINAHALLI,
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE WORK,
R/O: HANGODI COMPLEX, HALAGERI ROAD,
RANEBENNUR , DISTRICT HAVERI.
...APPELLANTS
YASHAVANT
(BY SRI. N.P. VIVEKMEHTA, ADVOCATE)
NARAYANKAR
AND:
Digitally signed 1. SIDDALINGAMMA W/O. GUDDAPPA HALEMANI,
by YASHAVANT
NARAYANKAR AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE,
Date: 2023.11.07
10:00:48 +0530 R/O: HALAGERI, TQ: RANEBENNUR,
DISTRICT HAVERI - 581115.
2. HANUMANTAPPA NINGAPPA DODDABELLANAVAR,
AGE: 71 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O: ARALIKATTI TQ: HIREKERUR,
DISTRICT HAVERI - 581115.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:12768-DB
RFA No. 100088 of 2015
3. GANGAMMA
W/O. BASAVANTAPPA JADIYANNANAVAR,
AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE
R/O: LINGAPUR, TQ: HIREKERUR,
DISTRICT HAVERI - 581115.
NOW AT NEAR PUBLIC SCHOOL,
RANEBENNUR.
4. CHANNAVVA W/O.BASAVANTAPPA KAREGAR,
AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE
R/O: KALIDAS NAGAR TQ: HIREKERUR,
DISTRICT HAVERI - 581115.
DIED ON 19-05-2015 HIS LRS
BROUGHT ON RECORD
AS PER ORDER DATED 16-08-2022 AND
ALSO AMENDED THE CAUSE TITLE.
4A. RAMESH
S/O. BASAVANNEPPA KAREGAR,
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE JOB,
R/O: NEAR GOVERNMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL,
HONNALI ROAD, SHIKARIPUR,
DIST: SHIVAMOGGA-577427.
4B. PARAMESHWAR
S/O. BASAVANNEPPA KAREGAR,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE JOB,
R/O: BALAMBEEDU CROSS,
OPPOSITE TO B.C. PATIL'S HOUSE,
HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI-581111.
5. DEVIRAVVA
W/O. SHEKHAPPA NADUVINAMANI,
AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE,
R/O: GOURISHANKAR NAGAR, RANEBENNUR,
DISTRICT HAVERI - 581115.
6. SHANTAVVA W/O. VEERABASAPPA
HALYALA @ KAMBALI,
AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE
R/O: SHAMBAVINAGAR,
BEHIND KUD, DHARWAD.
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:12768-DB
RFA No. 100088 of 2015
7. MALAGEVVA W/O. RAMAPPA AGADI
AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE
R/O: LOKIKERI, DAVANGERE.
8. MAHADEVAKKA
W/O. KRISHANAPPA BHANUVALLI,
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE
R/O: YALENURKIPPA, TQ: SHIKARIPUR,
DIST: SHIMOGA.
9. VEERAPPA YALLAPPA HATTARAKI,
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE
10. JAYALAKSHMI D/O. VEERAPPA HATTARAKI,
AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WORK,
11. NEELAMBIKA
D/O. VEERAPPA HATTARAKI,
AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WORK,
12. BHAGYASHREE
D/O. VEERAPPA HATTARAKI,
AGE: 13 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WORK,
RESPONDENTS NO. 11 AND 12 ARE MINORS
REPRESENTED BY THEIR FATHER AND GUARDIAN
RESPONDENT NO. 9.
RESPONDENT NO. 9 TO 12 ARE
RESIDENT OF LINGANAMATH, TQ: KHANAPUR,
DIST: BELGAUM.
13. YALLAVVA
W/O. SIDAPPA YATTINAHALLI,
AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE,
R/O: BEERADEVARA TEMPLE,
RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI - 581115.
14. RATNAVVA
W/O. SIDAPPA YATTINAHALLI,
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE
C/O. K.S. HAMPANNA, KADENANDIHALLI,
OPP. INSPECTION BUNGALOW, HIREKERUR,
DIST: HAVERI - 581115.
15. ROOPA D/O. SIDAPPA YATTINAHALLI,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WORK,
C/O. K.S. HAMPANNA, KADENANDIHALLI,
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:12768-DB
RFA No. 100088 of 2015
OPP. INSPECTION BUNGALOW,
HIREKERUR,DIST: HAVERI - 581115.
16. KUMAR S/O. SIDAPPA YATTINAHALLI,
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
C/O. K.S. HAMPANNA, KADENANDIHALLI,
OPP. INSPECTION BUNGALOW,
HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI - 581115.
17. DEEPA D/O. SIDAPPA YATTINAHALLI,
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE
RESPONDENTS NO 14 TO 17 ARE
RESIDENT OF C/O. K.S. HAMPANNA,
KADENANDIHALLI,
OPP. INSPECTION BUNGALOW,
HIREKERUR,DIST: HAVERI - 581115.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SANJAY S. HEGDE FOR
SRI S.R. HEGDE ADVOCATE FOR R3, R7, TO R9;
R11 AND R12 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY FATHER GUARDIAN;
SRI VIDYASHANKAR G. DALWAI ADVOCATE FOR R6;
NOTICE SERVED TO R2, R4(A) AND R4(B), R5, R10, R13 AND R16;
R14, R15, AND R17 ARE HELD SUFFICIENT;
R1 IS ABATED)
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 R/W.
ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC, 1908, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:02.02.2015, PASSED IN
O.S.NO.64/2014, ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC.,
HIREKERU, DECREE THE SUIT OF PLAINTIFFS AS PRAYED AND
GRANT ANY OTHER RELIEF IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF
THE CASE BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
H.P.SANDESH, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-5-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:12768-DB
RFA No. 100088 of 2015
JUDGMENT
This regular first appeal is filed challenging the judgment
and decree passed by the Trial Court in O.S.No.64/2014,
wherein the Trial Court granted share in favour of the plaintiffs
to an extent of 8/35th in 77/490th share of deceased-Siddappa
in all the suit schedule properties by metes and bounds by
getting appointed ADLR or appointing authenticated person by
the Court as Court Commissioner, who is convenient to them in
due process of law and procedure. Being aggrieved by the
judgment and decree of the Trial Court, the appellants, who are
plaintiffs before the Trial Court, have challenged the same.
2. There is no dispute with regard to relationship
between the parties and nature of the properties is concerned.
The only contention of the appellants in this appeal is that
Bharmappa died in the year 1987 and his wife Nagavva also
died in the year 1998 and their daughters were born prior to
1956 and the Court below has erred in allotting shares to them.
It is also contended that Bharmappa died in the year 1987 and
succession opened immediately after his death. The Court
below has erred in taking note of the fact that some of the
daughters were born prior to 1956 and calculating their share
NC: 2023:KHC-D:12768-DB
RFA No. 100088 of 2015
as equal share in the suit properties and hence, the judgment
and decree of the Trial Court is required to be interfered with.
3. Having heard the appellants' counsel and the
learned counsel appearing for the respondents, there is no
dispute with regard to relationship between the parties and also
about the fact that Bharmappa died in the year 1987 and in
view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Vinita Sharma vs. Rakesh Sharma1 wherein the Hon'ble
Apex Court has held that even the daughters are also entitled
to share as co-parceners equally to that of son and hence, we
do not find any error committed by the Trial Court in granting
share for daughters also. It is also important to note that the
suit is filed by the children of first wife of one Siddappa.
Siddappa is the only male son to Bharmappa and other children
of Bharmappa Ettinahalli are the daughters and the fact that
Siddappa married Yallavva as well as Ratnavva is also not in
dispute. The other parties in the suit have not disputed the
claim made by the plaintiffs and only the first wife i.e.
defendant No.13 has filed written statement and supported the
case of the plaintiffs and the fact that the plaintiffs are the
(2020) 9 SCC 1
NC: 2023:KHC-D:12768-DB
RFA No. 100088 of 2015
children of first wife-Yallavva through Siddappa is also not in
dispute. The second wife also gave birth to three children
through Siddappa i.e. Roopa, Kumar and Deepa. That is also
not in dispute and having taken note of the said fact that when
there are ten children of Bharmappa Ettinahalli and his wife
Nagavva having nine daughters and one son by name
Siddappa, said Siddappa has got 1/10th share in the properties
left by Bharmappa Ettinahalli. It is not in dispute that said
Siddappa got married Yallavva and Ratnavva and got three
children through first wife-Yallavva and three children through
second wife-Ratnavva and the second wife is not entitled for
any share. Out of 1/50th share of Siddappa same has to be
divided amongst the first wife-Yallavva and three children born
through first wife and the other three sons born through second
wife are also entitled for share and having divided the same,
defendant No.13 i.e. first wife of Siddappa is entitled to 8/350th
share and her three children i.e. plaintiffs 1 to 3 are also
entitled to 8/350th share each and the children of Siddappa
born through his second wife would get 1/350th share each.
With this observation, the regular first appeal stands disposed
NC: 2023:KHC-D:12768-DB
RFA No. 100088 of 2015
off and accordingly the preliminary decree passed by the Trial
Court is hereby modified.
4. In view of disposal of the appeal, pending
interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for
consideration and are disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
