Karnataka High Court
Smt A N Bhagirathamma vs N B Nithin Kumar on 27 May, 2024
Author: H.P.Sandesh
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:17700
RSA No. 295 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MAY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.295 OF 2018 (PAR/DEC)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT A N BHAGIRATHAMMA
W/O LATE YOGESHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/AT: ARAKERE VILALGE
BHADRAVATHI TALUK
SHIVAMOGGA - 577 233
K. BASAVARAJAPPA
S/O HANUMANTHAPPA
SINCE DEAD BY LRS
2. SMT. B. PRAMILA
W/O LATE BASAVARAJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH 3. SMT. SEEMA K.B
COURT OF D/O LATE BASAVARAJAPPA
KARNATAKA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
4. SANDEEP K.B
S/O LATE BASAVARAJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
APPELLANTS NO.2 TO 4 ARE R/AT
OCC: AGRICULTURISTS
RAVINDRA NAGAR
SHIVAMOGGA 577 201.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI G BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:17700
RSA No. 295 of 2018
AND:
1. N B NITHIN KUMAR
S/O N.K. BASAVARAJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
2. N.B. NISHANTH KUMAR
S/O N.K. BASAVARAJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS
RESPONDENTS No.1 & 2 ARE
R/AT ARAKERE VILLAGE
BHADRAVATHI TALUK -571 415
MANDYA DISTRICT
RESPONDENT NO.2 SINCE MINOR
REP. BY HIS MINOR GUARDIAN
MOTHER SMT. YASHODHAMMA
N K BASAVARAJAPPA
S/O N KARIBASAPPA
SINCE DEAD BY LR
3. SMT. YASHODHAMMA
W/O LATE N K BASAVARAJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURIST
R/AT ARAKERE VILLAGE
BHADRAVATHI TALUK
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI HIREMATHAD MAHESHIAH RUDRAYYA & SRI N
RAMAKRISHNA, ADVOCATES FOR R1 & R3)
THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE
JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DTD 23.09.2017 PASSED IN
R.A.NO.11/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND JMFC, BHADRAVATHI AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:17700
RSA No. 295 of 2018
JUDGMENT
The learned counsel appearing for the appellants
seeks time and this Court refused to grant time since there
is a concurrent finding. The suit in O.S.No.253/2010 was
filed seeking the relief of partition of 1/3rd share and
declaration to declare that the sale deed executed by the
defendants is not binding in respect of the plaintiffs' share.
2. The counsel for the respondents placing the
copy of the judgment passed in FDP No.4/2018 submits
that as against the concurrent finding though this regular
second appeal is filed, the aforesaid final decree
proceeding is disposed of on 04.04.2024, hence, no
purpose would be served in continuing this second appeal.
In the Final Decree Proceeding, the Trial Court granted 10
guntas in Block No.I in favour of petitioner No.1; 10
guntas in Block No.II in favour of petitioner No.2 and
remaining Block No.III, measuring 10 guntas is allotted to
the share of the respondents. The Trial Court further
ordered that the sketch produced by the Court
NC: 2024:KHC:17700
Commissioner along with the report is a part and parcel of
the final decree.
3. The dispute in the suit was also in respect of 30
guntas of land. When there is a concurrent finding and
also Court Commissioner was also appointed and the said
Commissioner has submitted the report along with the
sketch before the Trial Court to draw the final decree, I do
not find any ground to entertain this regular second appeal
as against the concurrent finding and final decree
proceeding is also disposed of and nothing is there to
decide in this second appeal.
4. In view of the discussions made above, I pass
the following:
ORDER
The Regular Second Appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SN
