Karnataka High Court
Hanamantraya vs Smt.Laxmibai And Ors on 26 March, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1965
RSA No. 200072 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 200072 OF 2018 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
HANAMANTRAYA
ADOPTED
S/O AYYAPPA METI,
AGE: 54 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: JANGAMURAL VILALGE,
TQ: MUDDEBIHAL,
DIST: VIJAYAPURA.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI SRINIVAS.B.JOSHI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by
BASALINGAPPA 1. SMT. LAXMIBAI
SHIVARAJ W/O ADIVEPPA BIRADAR,
DHUTTARGAON
Location: HIGH
AGE: 66 YEARS,
COURT OF OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
KARNATAKA
R/O: ALOOR VILLAGE,
TQ: MUDDEBIHAL,
DISTRICT: VIJAYAPUR.
2. SMT. GURUSIDDAWWA
W/O GIRIMALLAPPA ANGADI,
AGE: 70 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: JANGAMURAL,
TQ: MUDDEBIHAL,
DIST: VIJAYAPURA.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1965
RSA No. 200072 of 2018
3. PRAKASH
S/O GIRIMALLAPPA ANGADI
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: JANGAMURAL, TQ: MUDDEBIHAL,
DIST: VIJAYAPURA.
4. SMT. CHANNAWWA @
CHANDAWWA ANGADI,
(SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS)
4a. SMT. KAVITA
W/O SHRISHAIL HADALAGERI,
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD
R/O: C/O: SHRISHAIL H.M.
ANJANEYA COLONY, NITAWANI,
DIST: DAVANAGERE.
5. SANGAPPA
S/O BASAPPA ANGADI
AGE: 30 YEARS,
R/O: ANJANEYA COLONY,
NITAWANI, DIST: DAVANGERE.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RATNA N.SHIVAYOGIMATH,ADVOCATE FOR C/R1;
V/O DATED 08.02.2023, NOTICE TO R2 AND R3 IS HELD
SUFFICIENT;
R4(A) SERVED;
V/O DATED 26.11.2024 NOTICE TO R5 IS HELD
SUFFICIENT)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 100 OF THE CPC, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL
AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY THE
COURT OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, VIJAYAPURA, IN
R.A.NO.47/2015 DATED 24.11.2017 WHEREBY REVERSING THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., MUDDEBIHAL, IN
O.S.NO.167/2011 DATED 28.02.2015 IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1965
RSA No. 200072 of 2018
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL, COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN
AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)
1. This appeal is arising out a divergent finding in a
suit for partition. The said suit is dismissed. Against the
same, the plaintiff filed regular appeal. The said appeal is
allowed and the decree for partition is granted. The
genealogy is as under:
Ayyappa (dead)
Smt. Mahantawwa
Hanamantraya Smt. Laxmibai Gurusiddawwa
(Adopted son) w/o. Adiveppa Biradar
2. The propositus was Ayyappa. His wife is Smt.
Mahantawwa. The couple had two daughters namely Smt.
Laxmibai and Smt. Gurusiddawwa. Since they had no male
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1965
issues, they adopted Hanamantraya. The suit is filed by Smt.
Laxmibai, after the demise of Ayyappa who died in the year
1984 and also the demise of Smt. Mahantawwa. The date of
death of Smt. Mahantawwa is not disclosed.
3. Smt. Laxmibai claimed 1/3rd share alleging that,
her sister Smt. Gurusiddawwa has 1/3rd share and their
brother Hanamantraya (adopted) is having 1/3rd share.
4. The suit is dismissed on the premise that during
the life time of propositus Ayyappa i.e. the father of plaintiff
and defendants, there was a mutation wherein the name of
Hanumantaraya the adopted son is entered in the property
records. The trial Court has held that, the suit is time barred.
5. On an appeal by the first appellate Court the
appellate Court concluded that, the mutation effected in the
year 1984 during the life time of the father does not create
any right in favour of the adopted son as the document is
not registered. Aggrieved by the aforesaid Judgment and
decree, defendant No.1 is in appeal.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1965
6. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend
that, the suit is time barred and is rightly dismissed by the
trial Court, however, the appellate Court erred in allowing
the appeal and decreeing the suit. He would contend that,
the rights in the properties were relinquished by the father
when he was alive and mutation was certified in the name of
first defendant.
7. The appellate Court did not accept the plea on the
premise that the relinquishment is not registered. No fault
can be found with the said finding. Admittedly, there is no
registered relinquishment deed. It is also noticed that,
defendant No.1 has not taken a plea of ouster in the written
statement and there is no issue to this effect also.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant to substantiate
his contention relies on the Judgment of this Court in RFA
No.1368/2006. This Court has considered the said Judgment
and it is noticed that, the said Judgment is rendered in an
entirely different factual background where one of the parties
is a fostered son. In the instant case, defendant No.1 is not a
fostered son, but he is an adopted son. If defendant No.1
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1965
contends that, he is a fostered son, then he will not have any
share. Hence, the Judgment relied by the learned counsel for
the appellant does not apply to the case on hand.
9. Under these circumstances, the trial Court is not
justified in dismissing the suit on the premise that, the suit is
time barred. As far as the finding of the first appellate Court
that, there is no relinquishment in the eye of law for want of
registration of alleged relinquishment in favour of the
defendant No.1 is in accordance with law.
10. Hence, no substantial question of law would arise
in this appeal.
11. It is noticed that the trial Court has granted
8/36th share on the premise that the father died in the year
1984 and the daughter is not entitled to the benefit of
amended Section 6 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Since the
law declared by the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Vineeta
Sharma Vs. Rakesh Sharma and others, reported in
(2020) 10 SCR 135 comes to the aid of the plaintiff, the
plaintiff is entitled for 1/3rd share. Hence, the following:
NC: 2025:KHC-K:1965
ORDER
The appeal is dismissed, however, the share
of the plaintiff is holding that the plaintiff is
entitled to 1/3rd share. Defendant No.1 is entitled
to 1/3rd share and defendant No.2 is entitled to
1/3rd share.
Sd/-
(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)
JUDGE
SVH
