Karnataka High Court
Shankravva vs Ramanagouda S/O Basangouda Patil on 15 November, 2023
Bench: K.S.Hemalekha
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:13275
RSA No. 100167 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.100167 OF 2022 (INJ)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SHANKRAVVA W/O. SHIVALINGAPPA PATIL,
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: AGRAHAR TIMMASAGAR, TALUK: HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580021.
2. SRI. SHIVALINGAPPA S/O. BASAVANNEPPA PATIL
AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: AGRAHAR TIMMASAGAR, TALUK: HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580021.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. S. G. NANDOOR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. S.B. DODDAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. RAMANAGOUDA S/O BASANGOUDA PATIL,
AGE 69 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: AGRAHAR TIMMASAGAR,
TALUK: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580021.
Digitally signed 2. SRI. YALLAPPAGOUDA S/O NINGANAGOUDA PATIL,
by VISHAL
VISHAL NINGAPPA AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
PATTIHAL
NINGAPPA Date: R/O: AGRAHAR TIMMASAGAR,
PATTIHAL 2023.11.18
14:48:53 TALUK: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580021.
+0530 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S. S. NAGANAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR CAVEATOR/R1)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
100 READ WITH ORDER XLI RULE 1 OF CPC, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.09.2020 PASSED IN
R.A.NO.60/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, HUBBALLI,
DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND
DECREE DATED 15.04.2017 PASSED IN O.S. NO.247/2006 ON THE
FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, HUBLI, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR
PERMANENT INJUNCTION.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:13275
RSA No. 100167 of 2022
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The present second appeal filed by the defendants
assailing the concurrent findings of the Courts below, whereby,
the suit by one Ramanagouda S/o. Basanagouda Patil seeking
for permanent injunction in respect of the house property and
open site GP No.13 of Achatageri village, was decreed, holding
that the plaintiff is in possession of the suit schedule property
and the defendants are restrained from obstructing the
possession of the plaintiff over the suit property in any manner.
2. The plaintiff filed suit for permanent injunction
contending that the suit property, in an earlier partition
between the father of the plaintiff and husband of defendant
No.1 had fallen to the share of the plaintiff. Defendants inter
alia disputed about the oral partition and the possession of the
plaintiff in view of the said oral partition.
"MEMO
Herein the Advocate for the Appellants beg to
submit as under.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:13275
RSA No. 100167 of 2022
That the original plaintiff who is the
Respondent No-1 had filed original suit for
permanent injunction, and this
appellants/defendants have taken up specific
contentions that the partition is not effected and
disputed property is still in joint possession and
this issue is not at all decided.
Further the respondent No-1/Plaintiff died
recently and hence in view of death of
respondent No-1 this appellant's may kindly be
permit by reserving right to file comprehensive
suit for partition and this appeal may kindly be
dispose in the above case to meet the ends of
justice."
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits
that the plaintiff has died issueless. Appellant does not
intend to prosecute the present appeal and reserves right
to file a comprehensive suit for partition.
4. Said submission is noted.
In light of the submission and memo filed, the appeal
stands disposed of with liberty as prayed for, if so, advised in
accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE
