Sri Ganganarasaiah vs Ganganarasamma
2023 Latest Caselaw 7113 Kant

                                               -1-
                                                         NC: 2023:KHC:36631
                                                        RSA No. 945 of 2018




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                           DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

                                           BEFORE
                              THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

                          REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 945 OF 2018 (PAR)

                   BETWEEN:


                        SRI GANGANARASAIAH
                        S/O. LATE. RANGAPPA
                        DECEASED BY HIS LRS,

                        a). HANUMANTHARAYAPPA
                        S/O. GANGANARASAIAH
                        AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
                        RESIDING AT:
                        THIPPENAHALLI VILLAGE,
                        NAGASANDRA POST,
                        TUMKUR ROAD,
                        BENGALURU - 560073.

                                                               ...APPELLANT
Digitally signed   (BY SRI. S G HEGDE., ADVOCATE)
by SHARANYA T
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA          AND:

                   1.   GANGANARASAMMA
                        W/O. LATE. RAMAIAH,
                        D/O. LATE. RANGAPPA,
                        AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS,
                        R/AT. K.G. SHRIKANTAPURA,
                        DASANAPURA HOBLI,
                        BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
                             -2-
                                          NC: 2023:KHC:36631
                                         RSA No. 945 of 2018




2.   NARAYANAMMA
     W/O. KRISHNAPPA,
     AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
     R/AT. ARISINAKUNTE VILLAGE,
     KASABA HOBLI,
     BENGALURU RURUAL DISTRICT.

3.   RANGAMMA @ LAKSHMI
     D/O. LATE. GANGANARASAIAH,
     W/O. K.R. MURTHY,
     AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
     R/AT. KODIPALYA,
     VIDYAPETE POST, KENGERI,
     BENGALURU - 560060.

4.   CHIKKAMMA
     D/O. LATE. GANGANARASAIAH,
     AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
     R/AT: THIPPENAHALLI VILLAGE,
     NAGASANDRA POST, TUMKUR ROAD,
     BENGALURU - 560073.

                                            ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAJESHWARA P.N., ADV. FOR R1)

     THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 26.03.2018
PASSED IN R.A.NO.142/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE
VIII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MEMBER MACT,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE
APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 27.08.2014 PASSED IN O.S.NO.1137/2009 ON THE FILE
OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE NELAMANGALA.

     THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                        JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also

the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

NC: 2023:KHC:36631 RSA No. 945 of 2018

2. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that

the property belongs to the joint family and father died

intestate. DW.1 categorically admitted in the

cross-examination that no partition took place during the

life time of the father. The Trial Court granted 1/2 share in

favour of the plaintiff and the same has been challenged by

the first defendant before the First Appellate Court and the

First Appellate Court also affirmed the same. Hence, the

present appeal is filed before this Court.

3. The main contention of the leaned counsel for the

appellant before this Court is only with regard to the

apportionment of shares, contending that granting of

1/2 share and it is also important to note that plaintiff also

sought for relief of partition of 1/3rd share and not

1/2 share in the suit schedule property and when there is

an admission on the part of DW.1 in the

cross-examination that there was no partition among the

family members.

NC: 2023:KHC:36631 RSA No. 945 of 2018

4. The plaintiff and second defendant are the sisters

of the first defendant and father also died intestate and

though defendant No.2 in the written statement claimed that

her share is given by way of jewellery and ornaments, the

fact that immovable property is left by the father is not in

dispute. When such being the case, the two daughters and

son are equally entitled to 1/3rd share and whether the

second defendant claims the share or not is immaterial and

legally entitled for 1/3rd share. The same ought to have

been taken note of by the Trial Court and the First Appellate

Court and the very reasoning of the Trial Court that plaintiff

is entitled for 1/2 share and also the First Appellate Court

confirmed the same is not correct and ought to have granted

1/3rd share each to each coparceners.

5. Suit is filed in the year 2008 subsequent to the

amendment and there is no dispute with regard to the fact

that the property belongs to the joint family. When such

being the case, no grounds are made out to admit and frame

any substantial question of law and there is no dispute with

NC: 2023:KHC:36631 RSA No. 945 of 2018

regard to the property that is left by the father. When such

being the case, three legal heirs of the deceased are equally

entitled for 1/3rd share each and with that modification, the

second Appeal is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

KG