Karnataka High Court

Heerasing vs Chandrabai on 11 August, 2025

Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar

Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar

                                               -1-
                                                          NC: 2025:KHC-K:4558
                                                       RSA No. 200377 of 2025


                    HC-KAR




                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

                                       KALABURAGI BENCH

                             DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

                                             BEFORE

                   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

                        REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 200377 OF 2025
                                           (DEC/INJ)

                   BETWEEN:

                       HEERASING
                       S/O HANAMANTASING HUNNUR @ HAJERI,
                       AGE: 72 YEARS,
                       OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                       R/O: C/O: NARASING
                       S/O BHEEMASING SHEKHADAR,
                       HEBBALATTI, TQ: BABALESHWARA,
                       DIST: VIJAYAPURA - 586 113.
                                                                 ...APPELLANT

                   (BY SRI BAPUGOUDA SIDDAPPA, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by RENUKA          AND:
Location: HIGH
COURT OF               CHANDRABAI
KARNATAKA              W/O DASHARATHSING SHEKHADAR,
                       AGE: 86 YEARS,
                       OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK @ AGRICULTURE,
                       R/O: C/O: GURAPPA
                       S/O NAGAPPA UKKALI,
                       HEBBALATTI, TQ: BABALESHWARA,
                       DIST: VIJAYAPURA - 586 113.
                                                               ...RESPONDENT

                        THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF THE CPC,
                   PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT       AND
                   DECREE DATED 04.07.2025 PASSED R.A.NO.15/2025 ON THE
                                  -2-
                                              NC: 2025:KHC-K:4558
                                          RSA No. 200377 of 2025


HC-KAR




FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
VIJAYAPURA AT VIJAYAPURA, AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.11.2024 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.131/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE CII
ADDITIONAL    SENIOR   CIVIL  JUDGE   VIJAYAPURA  AT
VIJAYAPURA AND ETC.

    THIS RSA, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM:     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR
           AMARANNAVAR

                       ORAL JUDGMENT

This Regular Second Appeal is filed by appellant -

defendant challenging the judgment and decree dated

04.07.2025 passed in RA No.15/2025 by the I Additional

District and Sessions Judge, Vijayapura wherein the

judgment and decree dated 23.11.2024 passed in

O.S.No.131/2018 by II Additional Senior Civil Judge,

Vijayapura has been affirmed.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

3. The appellant was defendant and the

respondent was plaintiff in O.S.No.131/2018. The

respondent -plaintiff earlier had filed suit for partition and

separate possession of her share and subsequently she got

NC: 2025:KHC-K:4558

HC-KAR

amended plaint and sought for declaration of title and

permanent injunction. The said suit came to be decreed

and respondent -plaintiff came to be declared as owner

and possession of suit scheduled -A properties. The

following are suit scheduled -A properties;


                                Asses
Sl.                 Area                     Situated      Valuation for
         Sy.No.                sment
No.                As- GS                       at          Jurisdiction
                               Rs. P.s
1     665/1§          00.18      00.30 Nidoni               Rs.1,50,000.00
                   PK-00-03                  Village of
                                             Vijayapura
                      00-15                  Taluk
2     666/3PÉ        01-00       00.54       - do -         Rs.2,50,000.00
3     666/3PÀ         01.02      00.13 - do -               Rs.3,50,000.00
4     51/A1           01.20      03.17 Inam-                Rs.4,50,000.00
                                             Handhinal,
                                             Tq: bilagi,
                                             Dist:
                                             Bagalkot
                                 01.14                     Rs.12,50,000.00

The appellant -defendant challenged the said decree in RA

No.15/2025 and said appeal came to be dismissed on

merits and affirmed the judgment and decree passed by

the trial Court.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant would

contend that Smt. Laxmibai is wife of the appellant -

defendant namely Heerasing. The Smt. Laxmibai got item

Nos.1 to 3 of suit scheduled -A properties under ME

NC: 2025:KHC-K:4558

HC-KAR

No.9494 as her share from her father Dasharathsing. He

submits that said ME No.9494 (Ex.D.9) has not been

challenged and therefore, Smt. Laxmibai was absolute

owner of item Nos.1 to 3 of suit scheduled-A properties.

The said Smt. Laxmibai died on 08.06.2018 and death

certificate is at Ex.P6. He submits that after death of the

Smt. Laxmibai her husband i.e., appellant -defendant -

Heerasing has inherited properties of his wife Smt.

Laxmibai and he is absolute owner of item Nos.1 to 3 of

suit scheduled -A property. He further submits that Smt.

Laxmibai and the appellant -defendant -Heerasing have

no issues out of their marriage. He submits that as per

Section 14 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (herein after

referred to as "H.S Act" for brevity), Smt. Laxmibai is

absolute owner of item Nos.1 to 3 of suit scheduled -A

properties and after her death they devolve upon the

appellant -defendant being her husband. He submits that

Smt. Chandrabai -respondent -plaintiff being mother of

Smt. Laxmibai is not entitled to inherit her properties after

the death of the Smt. Laxmibai. On these grounds, he

NC: 2025:KHC-K:4558

HC-KAR

challenged impugned judgments passed by trial Court and

Appellate Court and prays to allow this appeal.

5. Having heard learned counsel, this Court has

perused impugned judgments and other materials placed

on records.

6. The plaintiff -Chandrabai is wife of the Sri

Dashrathsing and Smt. Laxmibai was their daughter. The

appellant -defendant i.e., Heerasing is husband of Smt.

Laxmibai and relationship between parties is not disputed.

The said Smt. Laxmibai died on 08.06.2018 leaving behind

her husband -Heerasing -appellant -defendant. It is also

not disputed that Smt. Laxmibai and Heerasing have no

issues.

7. As per partition, item Nos.1 to 3 of suit

scheduled property were allotted to share of Smt.

Laxmibai and there is mutation to that effect in ME No.

9494 (Ex.D9). It is also not in dispute that ME No.9494

has not been challenged. The Smt. Laxmibai by virtue of

ME No.9494 become absolute owner of item Nos.1 to 3 of

suit scheduled -A property. Item Nos.1 to 3 of suit

NC: 2025:KHC-K:4558

HC-KAR

scheduled -A properties became absolute properties of

Smt. Laxmibai by virtue of Sub Section 1 of Section 14 of

H.S Act. The said Smt. Laxmibai died on 08.06.2018. The

death certificate of Smt. Laxmibai is at Ex.P6. The said

Smt. Laxmibai was Hindu and on death of female hindu

general rules of succession are governed under Section 15

of the H.S. Act. Section 15 of H.S Act reads thus;

"15. General rules of succession in the case of female Hindus.― (1) The property of a female Hindu dying intestate shall devolve according to the rules set out in section 16,―

(a) firstly, upon the sons and daughters (including the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter) and the husband;

(b) secondly, upon the heirs of the husband;

(c) thirdly, upon the mother and father;

(d) fourthly, upon the heirs of the father; and

(e) lastly, upon the heirs of the mother.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub- section (1),

(a) any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother shall devolve, in the absence of any son or daughter of the deceased (including the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter) not

NC: 2025:KHC-K:4558

HC-KAR

upon the other heirs referred in sub-section (1) in the order specified therein, but upon the heirs of the father; and

(b) any property inherited by a female Hindu from her husband or from her father-in-law shall devolve, in the absence of any son or daughter of the deceased (including the children of any pre-

deceased son or daughter) not upon the other heirs referred to in sub section (1) in the order specified therein, but upon the heirs of the husband."

8. If the said Smt. Laxmibai had son or daughter,

the defendant being her husband would have inheritted

item Nos.1 to 3 of suit scheduled -A properties along with

son or daughter as per Sub Section 1(a) of Section 15 of

the H.S Act. The said Smt. Laxmibai died leaving behind

her husband i.e., appellant -defendant -Heerasing.

Properties which are at item Nos.1 to 3 of suit scheduled -

A are inherited by Smt. Laxmibai from her father -

Dashrathsing. In the absence of son or daughter of

deceased - Smt. Laxmibai, properties inherited from her

father shall devolved upon heirs of the father and not upon