Gurushanthamma W/O Gurushanthappa vs Amba Bai W/O Late Sidramappa Hagargi on 8 June, 2009

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Gurushanthamma W/O Gurushanthappa vs Amba Bai W/O Late Sidramappa Hagargi on 8 June, 2009

; %§~:2s;£% 2%-3? % A A» WD"'¥i :o:HHmM'\>H4J wwwmmz mu" Hnﬁﬁmﬁwﬂﬂﬂk WWW ﬁiﬁﬁiﬁﬂ? Q? K&WN&?&%M Hﬁﬁﬁ amzm W? RTﬁ.$§Nﬁ'E"&E% MEQW simzataﬁ at Himpur vﬂlaga csf Guibarga Taiukg and tha p1a'n1i:iﬁ' based rm case on the &a§e11d.am: am ghe mm: M aids: sﬁmtaer 11.3., defntndant 'beirg the pﬁrmm Bhi @ Bkﬁmraa and plaitxtiﬁ was joimd posazws:'m1"'£)f with her mzy elder sigma the J only wim rm cm-med :5 emf 'the:

phinﬁg by trying mm at, defendant in the plaizntiﬁ' mm ft:

kxmw ef 5% éiefendant ta alienate the suit cimumtancﬁ, that the 1» give the plainaﬁ' rm msmng the éefmdant mt requmt sf the piairxtiﬁ', the suit pm1:mo' " 21 and separate posmsaion af in 'rim suit sahﬁule psroperty.

Z ammaam mug ma afdm' aim: of the plaintiﬁ' }ar=*i2i1e: écix'nit'dr1g tlw mzatzmmhip as we}? as 'bath of mam ﬁaughtars and the {July hegal heﬁu w their pamzzmg V 'mr.:?:rmd:c1 that at th¢ tima of death at' tlrmir parents, aufi.

m'c:part$es WEE mt heki by the gamma because bath the ,9,2:« mmumw mama» w 3:

§ $ »wm_m~§..vwms ma" mmmmmsmnm Hiwﬂ'? mmwm we" WWNAYAW WWW ﬂﬁﬁiﬁﬁﬁ éﬁﬁ' %'A&NA?&%& Mgﬁﬂ QOMMV W?

pamm had trmrafwred the premties wizieh were held by mm in fawn: of the daeferﬁszzta umier va1'inu$_-sale dads am}. gﬂ dead am. aver ainm the: said the gmw-rm in the m of the & t, bmn emjoyirag the aarne am; ix; the decfmxciantﬁ 13%' thereaﬁ;e:rwards,.,. the lmrxdaya ertc., whﬁctz zwipta as wail as tax rem-:ipm. $ as me propcrty was amaamggqr gt" filing of the suit by the being entitled ta any si1a.j*} e" {mes not arise. Gm ztrmre dafendant was that jurisﬁistinn of. mt get atizractad because of arm h¢~;1sa'§mpmy.'me aaiﬁ stand mm by the ' led the fszfaa' I C9112": ta frame: Eric faiiawing :':.=;$_;ueg~.* _ ﬁefmdant am aesvaww and in jeitxt gosswsiozz sf the suit whesduka pmwﬁm?

2% Wh:et}nerthaep1aintiﬁ'pm"vmt.I"1at;thaéefer1dant:;$ iiiﬂaﬂy trying ts alienate {ha suit pmperty ta muse less 2:: tlrm pmmﬁﬁ?

ﬁr"

ﬁmﬁ ﬁﬁiﬁii? Q? %&RMA%"§"ﬁ%%%. Eﬁﬁﬁ 3 Q 3 $ Q § § :

§ a 5 § §m 3 § 3 3 5 i E E :

"#7..

6.

Whsethcr ths plaintiﬁ '$ entitled far haif Shara by mm and beunds in the suit propartim?

Whether the £ pram 'de<:m.sed B3::1'm*a<> azﬁ his wifs have thair prcapaertics includixsg suit i¥$;3*'.._.§f gift 01% ms defendant during tlmiir she Whether tlm pLainm' ;:a s;zi1:%Eti.e:§ f§':'« fii:§:«A...'r¢~3¢f :

prayed in the phi;1t?

What; ciacree er orﬁ;mf?%.

4. Bath behalf of plairltiﬁ', pcwer sf attomzay ax P'.W.1 and nine:

side. :31' the éefendant the Lﬁs, 3.31.1 to 4 E1 ts 3148 wwa phage} an rmrd. ,""ﬁ:1g on apyzméaﬂnn af the evidenzzﬁ an tha 3;-a.t12& Gamma} for the »A ﬁmt 'three imam and issue 130.5 in the = mid issue Hm» agaimz, me defendant.

issue was aim hex}; against 'rim dﬁnﬁmxt.

* Tfiﬁ sﬁit was decreed and piaintzﬁ wag wztitlw 'tn half fsb§m in all tbs suit mnperﬁm azzé aiun separate ' psmassisn sf hm' aham mm éefanﬁant wag rwﬁaimd by way nf irzjurmcirécarz ﬁéam madxiﬁrg with the suit gang? in am¢mn.;ms;Fm T517' , W-.." vxuI>WcD4>¢V¢"-"'l¢ﬂ<E:W€I'"'%'W'ﬁ* Wm vwmmammmmﬂm Wzwﬁ mwwm UK' amwmmmw. mam EQURT Q?' Kﬁﬂﬂﬂwaﬁﬁa ﬁiﬁﬂ mam" W? %&§%M&'E'.&K& HEGH any . The ciafmﬁant appealed to the wave: appellatse Gaurt and the Iearﬁ Judge :;tf ----t§1a lower amnam mart ecnctmed with the abmaa vigsg Tpy the tzriai Cenrt arﬁ a%1 was dismissed. A' mm or the cmzm baimv & apﬁl by the ciefezzdant. :

5. i have Shri Yoganwimha _V and tlm mm Sr.C3c:unse1 the rmpondent and Sh:-i Ygga fiarasﬁnha fer the aﬁ§1»§§;§a.§t§' submittaﬁ that aermin fa:-rm in §ii$§:§.:;t§.and they am an parties: 'tzseing mlazitccl A ; §:;,:e arid both the sistem being the only % = 1?gx%*ff%,, gm; parmta namaly Emma' mm mm:

31:51 it '13 aka mi in dizgrute ﬁat isam Heal ﬁn:

V 3"'~a;:f suit. itm beiargari $9 the faflzmg item 3&3? tn the moﬁmn In othw wards; it in rwhadfa ' sxase that suit items Wm mamﬁai prcapmftrins of £115 warm. ﬁwé§yuwarth@ b&wmn&wmrﬁm ﬁr 3 'Mi WM d""z\V"*'>n. li Wﬁfﬁ § %' E 3 E5 Q t § g § § 5 § 3 E E?

§ E and lhgﬁ'(0Kl"W\ an grim cnly with mam te ﬁﬁpossessicn of the suit item by the pazrerzm in favaur afthe dﬁexzdants. It is :13: speciﬁc case of the dcfszaciant that the suit. item a and mm were giﬁaad to the dﬁ'ez1:ia11t. ;.;ne;am um!' m' rgimrm-ea. gt: dazed éiafhéé house ﬁurirxg Ko.1~'?4 _ Brnmanna* in favcsur of k antgmm gage am dam 29,1m;9§5 am mm her prcperty as R git deed these éispoasmsiaons aaramam haa been in anﬁ far maorse than 33 yaars enjtzying the suit pmperty wiﬂwut " all thﬁe faetam, mm Sxneauzmi arguea beimv erred in mi zzatziairg 'dag fact that K V' " {same ta ths mm (sf dsfﬁndant thmmh rwfstmaci éactwm and tiieaa ﬂacumnhs ware R mars than 36 yeam 91% as an the ﬂats afﬁlim eftkm suit, prmumptiazz Linda' ﬁtien % 5%' the Evﬁenm Act nwht as $3.,» ., .3"

:Wé>"'as.aaWM*'ca 9 wmmxre WWW _ ......- wvc£$'IIlr mu V_'meqi"v0'Iuut"'°|to€3K'&\R WWI EWWWIWQWEWKWJW W"§%'%1$'§§C"¥ %»s§uni'm«a#$$§ W9? have b-an drawn in fawn: sf '(IE3 defendants but urx£ortu::1a*t:aIy§ the n-1'33 Court as we}} as the Enwe;-jappeiiate Court want asﬁ" in & 1:a..rg4.mt and ¢t:rrsic2g:fé§éi:.:"}Ii:'}§ei¢\rant ma'£e:r3a§' and rmréﬁ perwe fnciing . z:¢§t queatigsning mncurrent ﬁnﬁi11jg*"éf"t'£1¢ = the warm have erred an by?

thfa ceurt in semnzl '*£hez'%§f¢rrv,§ xﬁxavitﬁzbh. In the {name cf 68 ef the Eviszlencae Act to prodttwei by the under law and the trial upon 9. nlinum 3:6 mm mm piaintiﬁ' is 531% "the ma: ise.-ma anti what am ma:

Ce§.--.:z.'tx kéi ﬁf- the kywar appeilatc Court alas is that the yiaixztiﬁ' herseif 3% not varéaus wig deeds and ﬁfe ciaecia exeeuted By_ 221,3 in famur 91'' the &efe1:rda::1t and withaut n ax miief cf setlzim aaimle titan saie dczeﬁ G1' prayirag far = _ a-- ' m the aeﬁeczt timt the twansactinn were 1391: b1nd' ing V ~*§en thg plainﬁﬁl the ma' } Cant; maﬁa nest ham skuﬁw' the mﬁm huﬂn an the ciefmﬁani. as if it was a dafendant who went befare ma mutt far seczkirig the re-Jiaf.

aﬁ3:M"\'0,4"W'J"« ...u.. uvunl ur nan-KNAIAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH 10

8. The baa:-nod Sncounsel argued that a suit for partition arises only where the p]m':m:iﬂ'is able gzuglmw the existence of property left by her parents having a legal right or veabad right in the instant case. neither the time of ﬁling of suit 5;»:

been able tn show 3 "of Put the burden to prove various documents and the sale deed and giﬁ deed and aha by won «me we «mums beam .. placed by the defendant was en' trial Court to have accepted

9. rtunntnly, the trial Court went inm the "the signatures found in the document, why were. exam1ned' and also recorded oer-tam' based on conjecture: and aurmiaea and merely in the documents ﬂare was no mention of the % Uﬂﬁﬁ IJ£\u I 1.:-nu...-.. .

pLaintiﬁ'andmcre]yb¢cauaefthaacomcintheevidenoc that parents lmd equal aﬁection to their those racmra could not lmvc land the 1r'm1 Court 9;; the registered document which stood the in validity han not been qu¢ntio:r1éid"byé_ emotional factor: rather on the point The.refore, the: trial Court suit being decreed ami av.-d.._.,,._.,E which conﬁrm the mm to be interfered with in the courts have committed requn-um gefqt wit to: pat" "and both the: courts also Qﬂofthe Evidence Act.

lk); xthc above submission, the learned appellant: placed reliance on the in ILR 1999 KAR 1524, (1987) 3 sec V_,_,...... .. ............w. um. wax. ur mmmnm men COURT or KARNATAKA HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA HIGHJ F .k;j%%%:*1k1.%,%*(i937) 3 M 723, zomscc (Cri) 1077, AIR 1996 5::

|\Jf\r\I'\ u ..,..,..... .....n Wu... ur nu-ummmm man COURT or KARNATAKA HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA HIGH I2

11. On the other hand, learned Szncournel Shri Jayavittal Rao Kolar for the reaponaexgta-pxamtiﬁ supported the judgments of the Courts that the concurrent ﬁndjxga cnfthe second appeal having of the CPC. It is Court upon apprechation of record found that the doctlnmlm namely the sale deed suspicion, infc-.re.noe and aﬁrmed by the lower could not be 'mtcrfer¢d with by thh being the Court of facts and Court being the ﬁnal Court on facts, ' with the trial Court, no question of % the second appeal arses' . As far as the mjmmghipbamaulmgparaeammunpmperuesrwnby parents of the pm-tics an regard to the nature of held by the parema areconcerued, the harmed Sr. ' Counsel also did not dispute the aubnmoion put forward bythc1earnedSr.Counselﬁ3rthaappaI1ant.

..~....?_...g...um um mmwmnmmm mum m...vUm wt?" WWMMMUQ wawa ﬂaw? Q? KARNAWKA HIGH WNW Q? K&RWA'¥'AKA HIQH 13

12. In order ta shew that ﬁndixw rmrclied by the Comm be@ partvktularly the néai Court am in gqmomxzm with the evidanm an mcord, mm um Qgurt through mﬁze pimdinga cxf the the evidcnm cf the: Witnmscaf. 53$' that the t:*1ai' Court was just1ﬁa:i' -V 3 cf D.W.i, power of egg "wii:§1&s"§*:'.ad. mi: }5:11aW@ge uf in the year 2955. In M pzam. reliance on the decxémzmf me to the avﬂence 9:' power sf the burdsm csf proof trial Court is eaxtmerrxed, that defenzizznt éiﬁ nut mag ugazgy Ai'aaV{i.:e 239,4 was mt proga-=m'ly frames& er éiﬁid' Aigsueé unnacaesaary axﬁ as such, having" led mard ta the isaum ﬁmad it is mt aspen to in mw mnﬁd tkzat the vial Saar': haﬁ put x wmrgly an 1:213 éefﬁndant is pram the sale anti the gift Clem. As far as the umectztimn cf the % V ~7§d§t€:m{:*i'1$ zzameky gab ﬂexed and tha gftciaeés £11 fawn: (sf tE1edefeImianthy3:mpa.zm1'mi3a{:%*11ed,t}xeiaa1ﬁ 69111133} referred 'ﬁe ms raievazit garmriséens af thc Eviadezzm %' 5 'M2 .cl"':«. WM unwnw wwwua Mr mnxnmimrm WWW $..'UUR'F $3? Kﬂ%NA"¥"ﬁ.W& HSGH «mum WW E(ﬂﬂNA'¥'&Kﬁ HIGH 14% Act undm wctiaon 68 arm aiae drew my attentian ta the mmmntary sf mm authar Sarlnar m mmwa prodzmﬁm}. sf damzmmt TE mt summ;g:;::< same evidaaace has to be paw as mm am dacument as well

13. Refexring to ::i¢% it £h.at mm is my man af ciccrnmzxt and it is f&t11&' wcuki have left mat as3'i'v"':JA;%7r,a_e_:V"a.:A;§vf'. {Ewe daughtam while @9533 (3"§}I$:l." no rwsan is may glam daughter the ymmgar am not givan any £3 aim a facmr which wag Taken by com whﬂa mmrding aw ﬁndirg an VA ;Vie<is:1z.a.va_g'Z£ In this ﬁend, harmed Sr. Cmxrisel mfmxw = gram: in ﬁetaii.

z As far as the rewtwcd ﬁascumants 1199:: which V .----T§aubmSas£cn mad: by the Iwrwd Sr. Caramel far the mapandgnt is timt when the dm are mid in nature:

it ﬁg mt mamaary fer the pminﬁﬁ ta: stack the reiiaf of % =:;%E%&?ﬁ§{A HIGR WI! nu'-I uncoup-

.» ,:"''?wVNIﬂ'nWsl W amwmuwmimivm wwm umuwm «aw wwwmmm WWW mwm" £3?' mmmrmm WWW CWJRE Q? aarxeellaﬁmn of web $9011: and it is enly whwe the t is of a vaidnbk nature? that the negmssity ta seek caneeihation af tlzw ciecuxszaasit = auch, nan-ﬁling of the rejoinder by the stammmzt 9f the dcfendant '_ £;et.;«éL '::e_'.§i;)1is x':§¢f§=e3;c:_tn havmg' rward tr: the law hem-zng_ % X defendant; did mt raise §arm% beznﬁé as mm to thee auch, it is me iate for mg that: cscsmamﬁon in me a.e£.:t:nd ~ ta iw ésemeti that ts quc-mien the arm contended that as the the sale deeds and gar: dwds to jcstgtarfzﬁ is tlw owner ef the auit item, it ts lead. poaitive evidamzuxe in this regard jmé cltsfandant has {aim ta aatablish the tn the wig dwéa anﬁ git deeds being .. in favour af time defendant, the trtiai Ceurt has re, ﬂy armw'e2~ad ﬂung Raﬁé in the nqaﬁvsa. ' -- R¢fercnae was am: maﬁa is Swticxn 31 af the Speciﬁc Reﬁd Act as ﬁard ta: ﬁ3ﬁ cf izzstzmgt ts mmtend ﬁgat it is rmly uaﬁmr tkmé cirzzumtances % :.\\.'ew°am'*W..:ﬂm :;

Q? ﬁﬂﬁwﬁﬁﬁﬁﬁ HG?! ﬂﬂﬁﬁﬁf as § 3 S g 2 3 § 9%:

§ 3 3 .2 t 3 5 § :

E 5 5 § In-|®'MW\tt uxrmwawoz "wmewwmwgux yang"

I5 mantimied, in the aaid scctieﬂ. that me& fcr.T*"p¢:ayer far &on af ﬁm t arisas. T1318 Gthgrrri by the lemma Counsel far thc parﬁas mmztmmd at this juzmmre «&}§e,mL.; taimn in rwpect uf mafia A rmrdezi by this Court

15. "a%g; 3aunse: Shri Yoga Naraaimha ff::r__ ﬁibmittad that the pl.aJ'ntiﬁ' cf' i:'§§ §iii§§0ssassi:an 51' the suit of clcfemdant and to thia the "admitted in the evidence given byhw £::%ajs,2ie.é.*:?1;39 can 1719,1997 with ward to am:

gr by her fathgr in fawur ef " anci themfore, the ma} Court was mt .' the prayer cf the appellant 133 place the AA befm-rs it amﬁ thmvsfare, an appllxcatia-13. is new V _ awléng permzxhainzz sf tfm Saar: as support the said. % givem er: cat}: in G*$.R'mé'?Ii 20%.

16. £3 far as thﬁ apﬁieafion is mrﬂ , the obgiacﬁan by the zmpandent is that the pzxveaeﬁirm in whxh 'Eh: piahxiiﬁ bani givm asriﬁmm an oat}: was :19': 3

§ x nuns-I-Iﬂ'*Q mcnvuru " ','.'-""'.f""'«:»~uuass ww uwwmw'wwumMx'w% waaaww uwwmﬁ V? ﬁﬂﬂwﬂiﬂﬂﬁk HEWW ﬁéwﬁwﬂy WP KARNATﬂ%M WEGH E'?

j2.1.dieia£ procaaditw in as much as the wart that rwerded ﬁxemiéenxmsfﬁwphintiﬂatftmtpaintaftimghaﬂ rm __;'urisdictio:1 so entertain the amt and was transferred to the court Imving é§fﬁ 'aa 51.3611, Whatmer avidermc thrai .; »?§;;:ex ccmsidereé. as evisienca given g; 8::

as '£5 warrant a ¢or1aﬁa§a§ii§§§2.ef 'the gang baggy; t in this mama. Mm over, pzainm which time appellant mt prnduceci before than thé widcnee new sought :9 be under saction 151 {sf am 'cm; 4? mus 2? gain: cm.

Az£r§i}'x4i:xHf___'appiica"$ien that hm baa: ﬁlnd in the ' the ﬂi sf the ease is 93:19 131% by H " m1c:ng' addiizimmi prayﬁr by Way af m the ylaint. in fix: appucmm m, mm Gram? 5 Rule. 2?, cm piaintiﬁ' ﬂaw swim 1:0 mm ;mra 49%} after para 4 and ﬁﬂnﬁ by para 4{E) & ({3} anﬁ as aka if; that prayer whim at para &{a} is seught is be éxmexmd by Way cf m, By the saié appiicatinng 2§.x~£"%«\fﬁ-kMf44.1|:4en:.v.wx ....M.. M _ U :I:

Q I 3 5 2 3 5 II-

D F-

E :3 O U I 9 J:

S I Z I 5

3. 3

§ 3 3 J I'.' 2 :

E E E I 5 Lu 3 E 1 3 J 5 non: 'rm I l1l\r1 0 'Whether the u-m1 court could have put the burden on the defendant to prove the sale ' ' _ ' to law?"

21. The amwor to tbs:

qumﬁmm of law will decide arguments

23. are than daughtnzm of daceaﬂdé " V " " and no other hens' %% mm;-1&9 3 belonged to the mm of the two: item-4 belonged to the mother. In w«5:~da,31 not the case of etthcr of the parties that ' M are the a.nt:es1:ra1 pmpmae. of the family of of the parties. It is also not disputed by the that the suit parties came to he transferred in the ofthe defendant by way ofsale deeds and deeds under Exs.D-2, D-3. D-5 and D-7. But, that only grievance ofthep1aiI1tiﬁiuthat,bywayofthesedeeda, theproperiiaa ,9./, m )mmv'UBi' E § § E E Eh § E 3 Q i} X E $ Q Q E §

33. ?

§ § 3% $ 3 § E § § § § éu 3 § § E* Q § § § E F§ 3 g E § § ; ..

§'.__ which Were: the aubjwt mattw cf the said. dcwa, thcsugh have bmn said to be transferraﬂ to the &efm:;§ax1t,yet§ awavding to the piaintiﬂ', time t;t'ar2sac.:§;§:§£a5.f"L:'za§i*z3 anly zzwmnai tra.xmax:tIn' as er, at the wamtg s;.h jg mv ts.

Newrtilrxelms, thz msaescutima <f:§'"ti:1e3¢ deeds ia not seﬁamly in A' 24' The rxaaxi: fem to nowhere £11 the pmint, We the eﬁgct that 'aim amdant pzagm mug: jqnuf the parties and ahtmmﬁ salsa deeds and git ggnnwhere plwdad by the uaevei any merciozri to get the suit ts her name fmm her parerzw.

1;:-.4.i t';§s:a.c:£*,, thts" pm: mad as a whale gm the »A the gait wnpaertizaa .fIle€3. with the sale deeda and we awaa mfermai in by 'V V' » apprmaecirzgé tiw trial mart smlrirg mrﬂtian at' am §s"t'ﬁ1: ;::r0ﬁt1m' an the faaﬁlg that the $11.51: prcxpmuea' mnﬁnueé ta rczmin with the parents {3}} {I342 dam efﬁling afﬁwsﬁit. ftiaaisutnbexmtﬁ tIi'3a't:. neitherizxﬂmplaizlt FaVa.§¢<"'t-m"'*»f"\ Ir § 3 Q § ﬁg $ %=* E 3 § Q 2 § :

§ § 1% z 3 § 3» :3 § 2 § 3 g 5 a E § £ 2 g E § § 2 5 3 mmmw yo aesvwmi' a:%1ts net in that: prayer, ia time any cef the docnwnm undm which the ddetxdant prawns' s are: wisé in Law G1' far izzrarzasactinns canxmt have égxy 4] piainﬁﬁ'.

25. In oantraatpzz ﬁom the pleadixga of an the athaer ham, has gig;-.l¢¢a vvdeeds and gift: deeds ﬁme docummm are havizg rm:-ard ts 'Elm am of ara:;agc:5¢n§%;%u¢§:5¢h gags back 'be: an year 1965, thc ,,', &1@s1: aftm' 22 3:1 :::f the {said Siam time dxmumants are: r@' ma am they' have their smmﬁty in law and will AA aanﬁaﬁé ta haw the saié saxxgﬁcity unﬁ} it is held sthwise mart of }aw, in amrdaﬂ with ﬂue pa:-ncedugre 1 -r§iamw'nt¢ Law.

$5, Before E wmider the we subetantial questiam {sf mm raised far mxmiéaaﬁsn, it has in baa msentiarwd at the cumat, that what: a ﬁfty gem mfsre the trial mutt ix: :1 my-'-=' uvv' '?""":""mm wn umnmmnnyxm ruww muunz U2" l%.&KNﬂEi°&%ii\ HEWM uwwm" Q? KﬁnRN&"E%.K% WEGH CQUW? Q? §€ﬁRNA'E'ﬁ*?"=;L..::~*='f%:;= suit far mrtimn aalsixg far a share in the auit pmperties as§nt11ecaseofthepresentp?.aintiﬁ',thepms:::;1ptinnis tha£ the amt itm continuaci £9 przvwue" 5 and fa1k3w1ng' the death of paren_ psardm, ma plaintiﬁ aria hm , it a but mm-ax 32;: :g% saei;k%£ar% partitskm cf hear halfaharc skit' ﬁefmﬂﬁnt does mt give the E£it;'71':z order to do am, aha plaizztiﬁ" $11': existing right car vmtecl a claim for partition sf the 9£$i% a;.4'-®§t"f§>r a, mszmmt, me: fact 91' the the righﬁul vwnaer af the suit the mmcmjon 9f the regstereé aaggamg by the parem cf the ciafendant, A.1f_.irz.a.t,« h:;:$H'&:3¥I The clam at' the suit, them was rm in tkm harﬁs at' am of the pa:-was I haza ahmdy wfmﬁ to in the .. a-zgxf :§ t that me mftiaa ﬁe mt dispute that the A' item were the seﬁ-acq;:.2.irad mnﬁ-ﬁes 9f the ' parents an&, as such, the: qumtisn <32' suit: imam being a%t:ra1 gxnperties andg t}1e%m$t1'1g paxmzm maﬁa fist have dispvuaed af the same to the ﬂetimmt 0f the £4 :¥>.C»i'»%-'uW.\.wobew ..

-aAtSwm'Mt$""¢& wwawmmm Vicav'kdY¥rdf5'k§7 'ﬁns;-l"ﬁ5"

§ § 3 § § % § 53::

$ 5:?

8 x Q 3 § P' § K § ii-

iQ $3 § 3 z 3 3 5 § § plaintiﬁ', cannot arms. In Ctthﬁi' Wﬁfdﬁ, aémzptirg the admﬁttad faxzm wiftl ward to the nature as an thc date of filing er the suit, is: ui'.i's.s:_¢ ntmiﬁwr the piaintiﬂ' has xawteci right in the suit imam be asA an the date of the suit, 1 in this xﬁ cxf "'i"heref<>ra, the very faundatkan mg. has built bar mlifwe is $3 very shaky and the piainﬁﬂ' will haw he shnw £*lm_1:_ execution of varims. sale deals parenm in fatmur af the cieﬁendant, am wici '31 Law and ham ms sxistexwe in eya.é.}%w tan in the alnmmﬁw, rm plaintiﬁ aught is for ﬁQn at am sale deeds and giﬁ:

A ' A 3:} such piaaciirzg is is be fcmnd in the plaizztiﬁk V' nor the 'aria! cant: ha ﬁanrwci any issua in @311-d ta ﬁwmaﬁnmsftbesahdaadsmzdﬂmgﬁdeaﬁaarin r%ard%ethe5n*bindix1geﬁ'¢etent1?xa;:2IaintiﬁZ }/.7 E x E P"

§ % § 33$ § E 3 § 2:

§ 3 E E 2 M 5 £» ?3 § 3 3 9 g 2 2 5 § 3 2 X E in 3 E 3 3 .2 2 2 2 § § x Z t § § 2 3 ._ }_ .

28. Thus, its tlm abamm of apeciﬁc pie-adixm and 211% reﬁetfbeing £21&iIIl% by the plaimriﬁ' hereesif, cauﬁ:

2-ightky did mt {ram any iamzas E of the deeciss in qumtiun or as ﬁards apex: '£118 mu-::hmg' upan the ahmae on is that mtant, cf in hazssham in the _ %

29. apymaczhtixlg the evidaticsg. sale deacis and ma Aafime dezﬁendant and mu put tha ta prave that the parsznts of the aesgmmg . '4v:Ai'_id:.':'::."=%n1"1sxfex' am: pmpmﬁm m the %%%%% the pbitlfiﬁ' fmﬁeif ﬂaw mt chnaae ta xmiidity af the 35.13 am; and the m éeeda A. &t:;w mm: mm mice a praym for deaclarixg ism said m as ixxvaﬁd in iaw nor mkw a prayer for " " carwelLaf$:m eftlm said dacumexxts, caauiéi €11: kial eezzrt, an im awn; gang gm m the amtterxt af §mmir:g the suit: cf tha giaintiﬁ" far mrtitiasn'? £'%:"

M hhhlﬂV'M Wwwm WWW wwwnsﬂmfﬁnﬂ mww muuxa wr wmwmmm. Hi'€§E=i COURT Q? %&ﬂM&'¥"A!*€\% HIGH COHRY

31. The settied position in Iaw is that, is new gziaaciirzg and Wham them is rm raligf Fzigt far ﬁrm court m $5,111: the ' 'chat Med113r1ng' ' the rcliaf aaughi: 'V as J a reﬁﬁ', which the ma}; wart the very {if having regard to the namre§..¢:?:.:;he mm by t}:1c necmsazy pleadings far W the plamﬁﬁ anti mam? by the ma: crmxrt, there wajsvzm fér trzal' court :0 have game inter tbs and the gft deeds, which wme csf Pursuarzt is $114: sale dmcis and the gift .'§:i:-%:eda:§§- deveiopmexzxts have taken gia.-se as cqukd be AA the dacumcnts pt-edumd by the écfendant, % am at Exs.ﬁ~S6 ta 3 3.44. Apart ﬁum the ciﬁaxxdant % actad 'Lzpen the am ams and the: gift dams. as is evident fmm the abeve decmnm, there has been Jim mamrial plamci by the plaintiﬁ tn shew that tkm gala dams azxdﬁzsﬁtdeeésaxﬁeanullityintfle eye:3f}a:w. Theanly vsuwvatrz mwwma 'MW ﬂa2'iil\l'I.l"%¥ﬂ"\i\#'§ ﬂ°"ﬁ¥'lW¥'"9l %.,_«.%J:'h§'%E 'WV Ekﬁﬁﬁlwﬂﬂﬁﬂiﬁﬂ W33??? WWW"? W wmmawmamwt W35'??? wwmma WW ﬁﬂﬁiﬁﬁﬁlﬁﬁﬁﬁ. maww wwwma NF?" Rﬂmlﬁﬂﬁﬁﬁﬁﬂ WEWW aﬁbrta maclabythe pkintﬁandevenbytlze trialeourtto hold that the suit pmywﬁm ttmrxtinuad ts: E1233 prcsmtics cf the parcnm is by apgareciatﬁzg on mm and mam czertain aismmias :_°:;f 'thc ciafanvdantfs wimwses with A'

32. It is pm-unent at ijmaz mm in mpec: gr the by the dcfmdant, the abjle ta shew' that the sllgrzatura of ibunﬁ in those thtzir pamnm at far that been abtained by playing ft"a1.'zié:1_cr*n; partim. Thacre 'm :39 Whisper either ix: tfne evidenm an behalf 9:' the u_na%" .3ugmt;%on is pm; ta '#1:: cIe.fe=:t1dant'a ' this @:-ard.

I33. thus amzmﬁdered the pbaﬁngs anﬁ tha A. s barns eat from the rmaré, E new amwea: ﬁlm ' iqumﬁmn sf Law raissad by this amzrt at the Ema"

(sf admzbsimn at' tfm appeal:

WWW mm? 9% mmnmm MGW 6 § 2 % E &u G 5""

3

:3 § 3 Q E E E § E § § in § E § E 3 E .u .. WON! .« mum mama w#'"'«mw'VMtIW5?"'¢6 N 34;. The ciaeumenta umn whﬁch the defendant has 2'e:}?Jed are mare than 30 years old. Section;"*3§.j"1 sf the Evidgrzec Act pwits a prmumgutiirzii bcing "f§vnu:* cf the ssgmaum which is pmpmm wxiﬁrg of am: pamon, is in sumandlyp whme the aft' that it was sac; eacacuwd arm wlmﬁ it purpam is be mmumd évxplanaﬁnn to &c?tw11 §0 fa;-trm» decumcms arc: aaid be are in the piace in which pagan with whom they thé' ' 132': sf iaw eor1tmn1ng' ' Sectizzsn 93 9;' ..&c.>ftvTm sqaplm is 21115 instant case, ncwhem;-.

' S1' in the evid,ez1:x§ it has $521 bzmught out " tarw af thus pmam acmuting these.

mkmm em, Exmﬁ-2, $3, 23-5 and 522', are mat the A at' 323 aaid pcraam ﬁrm, fatfm' and ms maths: §aa the nmsaa may be in rmpetft af the rﬁpecizisre éoctimenta bywmchtheauitpromtiw eametnbeﬁaxmfeneéwﬂm mmecftka t. Asfarasﬁmirammwutsinnig (Eb/3 u\o:.4m< hm A NVVI Wﬁﬁ Cﬂmﬂ? 5%? mmmmm Wﬁﬁﬁﬁ é Q E % § S:

Q 3% 3 3 $ L3 3 3 X § § § K § k 3 § § § 3 S 2 § § g E 3 E .......... mun-pa» mwwﬁwiwﬂ ww-

ecnmrmd, on the sides sf the tiefenciant, the vmy advccate who draﬁzad the ciese:-dis hm bimn d as I3§i.4«, anti 3331.1 73 aim examined to pmve that I3.'%:{., whaen these decjm W81? eatecuted. 'V 1;-::3,tr1[ es3 who else attwtcd tha docuK.§.eiité"i3v 'I'h%2°e§ when the the sslxgraatxzrw at the: ie:1:ec¥.ttir1§g 'ti'.viﬁ the my 'sf have been pravw by themaelves and mﬁrbl-U8 ' xrnng' ' the advncate, Wm by mamining tme of the was rmuj1*ﬁ on the part sf % that $212 suit items ma wen tI'9fi':a.i';&T;§:E aﬁéefenclant under tfmaa ssciacuwta.

" '~ _ A rwkhmaﬁ dacumenm.

mutt, if: the exam at' A.'£»{Rarzmhma V5; Krésrazgrnmg mpama. in mg 119%: Karnataka 1524, V' '"11' with. the aﬁbct «sf zwkfarad ciamzmenm and aﬁaer Sectioxas 8'? aﬁ 68 sf the Eviéeme Act and ﬁmtierxs 49 and 50 af the Rgistrafien Act read with .-v "Mr!%w*"%.""% 2 §z"''!9..3§k »« Miﬁimﬁ i WQH CQUR? Q? %'i&§%N&TDﬁ.?'E"»==.-ii'~==;:;'= E Z X § % § § 3 § Q 3 5?

§ § § § 5 g § is 3 E 2 § 3 § mar uwwu-w vs Swtiaarz 17 af the aaﬁ Act, 3% cbemwxaizilana:

"The eﬁwt sf 3. rwtarw Sectian 49 and so af the Raggamaaﬁan mane: be takserz by ciacmt 'm had. :3?' 53 ar the Ev£cI&::;:e §§;cr1;, is 1»: %$,&ti'%.$;£A§.':.'§i31--?aaat.":t13.'e dacjt has person what: admim mmcutisn time be ataackm as am i in a number of ;ae._,-i;mnm am allawcd tn gem tax the of decummts are not "Law, which View in my max ami peg-me. Tm » sucii ..'&m t ia sei aside, by a m Iaw, the document must be a valid lwl t and the which it En awuhed must be upheld ;af7esurt 31' law. Evan. the Supreme Caruri: has " ﬁiaée anly em dimtinctierz Whﬁﬁifi if the:

gigrsatlxre sf the dﬁ t is dizsputad GI' tha persan presamtixg ma dccumnt has act admitted exacuﬁmz, t3:m"eef, mm proﬁt' cf such riucxt may he naamsmy: But in all ather cases" 3'1} the §ﬂ t is set aside, by a éecm af 2,. wurt, the m'3'ect sf auch daczxmnt mada the fallcwing *1;/smmmm.&. Aihxwwxwmw 9. VMMM § § E i 3 § sﬁ E Q 3 § 3 2 § § E 2 Z 3 E 3 § § § 13 i E i Q E E € 5 E is § Q § 3 3% E i E i 5 E 34:

§ E

3. ._ in 5 § § :9 % E S E 3 § 5 § 31 must be xzpmlﬂ by every eeurt that dcal with tbs mm. Therefcre, the viwr <>f the m_ur'£:a mm rgazajzzg the validity af the saie Well as the QR deeé which were 16 14 yeam an the am ﬁf ﬁling cf & set aside on this " '4 3?. Earth the caurm A ail thmac. aspecm cf '(ha ages: ts be gven to the light of 1.151% previaiexxs ths Evidence Act. uaarmmtezygﬁaa the quastion of the weight cf D.W.1, power cf vthat, having rm paaormi Iqxmwlﬁa 3% eviéennae caxzrmt he loﬁriesri at ._ thc eviaiexwe 'sf ether mm the mm in day and an in tha gale dams givirg roam TV 3252.3. smart ulblmtely went an '$13 hold A ' and thc gft ﬁeﬁés $3.21 Basics 3:: aﬁimt can by the gyamtia' £03' partitinxz, zsniemmaneiy, 'T V . _ mutt fatally miascteﬁ {Em him.

m'~nxa\mwa#*a.m#"'%9£"%-W6 mwwwww mwwmﬁ 'MW' mmmwmammaim Wﬁww %...'wwﬁ"§' W? d 32

38. In Gthﬁf words, the antire ﬁndirm remrdacl by ﬁmﬁialmunwmhasedanm plmdiw, and no issuas being ﬁameti tcuehirzg upcn 11145 M13 deeds axﬁ gift deﬁ tar as:

canmallatﬁaﬂ of tirmw dwas. 1 wh.1ac;h' is not based an §3iﬂ1er_ .' ﬁamad in that mm-ca, be ma in be mt ﬁrxdings wig perwe mm haaeci cm prayer €31' issuea. In other no issues and 1-2:: law and such a. finding is V? sea by the sour: even in V' As' sewn-.d substantial quaatibn csf Law whvm the sale deeds and the gﬁ deeds .' taco he mid mt' theme dgaczmts have;

as mt vaiié in law, anti when the V V A herself dew mi: mm: rim any plea as rmrds that %% Eva1idity ar the sale am and the $1": dam $1' mm 3.

prayar fer daclaﬁxg tw mid éccwta R) be void in law' «or far ﬁnn cfthe miei éamam and down not we nmwoa-v'$a It E E E E E E K E Em E E 3 IE 95* E E E E E E E E E E E E E E 3 i E E E E E E g E E E E E E?

i E E E E E E E E E535 E E Ev, E i E E E § E E E E E E E 33 aver: piead an fraud or acnercion beirg piayeaﬁ by tha dﬁciant: in rampant (sf thaa ﬂm in her favour by hm' pamm, mum the trial the defmaam tn prove time dz-eds and :;e:.:{ Q dafmxdant whm the sale &e.e;'i}aEm mi 1 gmaé the vest sf filteaae for A dwlared as mid by any bf laéfin: with' prowéure knawn

43. Izw.r11e:1 aauxmai far tha in qumtian are rmly éncumenm is ccncerrzr-xi, Em affwt mr it is estaablishmi {ram that thwe sale deatia and gift at' mmiml nature car sham of a :L.gs far as the dmznn mferrml ta in this Wm 'E wmmei fer the wagondent is carnmxmd, in éaf Halappa V3. R reparted in 19%?) 5 597, it was held in the said mm that it wag aspen 'V"?mﬂmm mpbadwﬁmvmﬂwt$hamlmse dmd wag a mminal documnt and £116 ¢0 would summed in establishing that 13%. if they provad that the *9%/ § 3 § % 3 M E ﬁx 3 § 3 § J x Q a 3?

§ § 2 X § L § § 3 § ,3 3 i § § § § 2 § § :51 3 E § 3* § E E E § 3 WW |O(\>'5WVd'\N\ .H...-Wm: ~m9°wnfv4mwM'n:ot mm dceumnt; was mt inﬁmded ts be aeted upcrn but was ccsrmeiwaci and mcacuhad for ulteritzr purposes. said ciecisien is inappliaable ts the cam an ram and in Eng: mas' mnctirz as there Ex :39 p}ainﬁﬁ't1*:at the damxmmizts ma' L1 W i; 1 ﬁlm any oozmizucing ta esale A deeéa and gift dwcls wtacmﬁéjfby ef the p1a.intiﬁ' in ~*;:§f 'V

41. not have cloaed aim eym 3:43 which have steed the teat {bf decades mad merely on 't.I:1..-3 say avidanm an racard irxiicratirmg eertmn' mai' zzcmrt mum mat have heid «tiw were met ixamfarmcl by the parmts 1, . .

guié % Vfamsgémf the defendant. Dmpita the ciaﬁazudant piacing .' hot may producirg the sake wada and: the. gift 'which have hm marlced as Emﬁg 13-3: 1:)-5 ma time: was am widenca gzslaaed by me defandant to V. Vgsizaw that they were draﬁaﬁ by 3533.4 31% that they «rm grwantai for csxazczutimn bafare the rmﬁatzrirg authcrity arﬁ. ﬂ.W.3. was aka wment at that 6.3325? {Indvar these % ?_.A...,:. '-U"4"CD'M' W. ...........ww.mm. .m.m »..u-um var' mnnmvumxm mi.-ii-1 CQUKE {W %ﬁE€Nﬂ'¥i»'M& WWW COURT OF §(ﬁ.RNﬁ"'f'&Kﬁ 545$?"

plainﬁﬁ' was abs awam ef the suit; prom-tim stanciing in the 11am cf the déhmdant in the righm. 'ﬁmefore, Wht:':1'1 aueh beixg £113 faem af an nt now aeughi: ear: be K quemﬁrm,

43. The Apm (3our't §;caJm ' 'kéitiz the case of Viayahag Vs, in AIR 2909 SC M33, hm ::::?r:«sn.=:i*é'e-;'£*:1°).'*uL_§s '*7. Ekocedure Cede 22 of 2392), the

3. provisa ta Oztier W %erc¢a¢, wlﬁch raads as unde:3:':

appliratinn ﬁat t ' " ahai}. after the traii has mmm%d, V. he mama to the mnciuaimz that in T. Que dﬂigmm, the party catsuit}. mt haw:

mama' hefere the eemmncment cf It Em muszzlm in a mzsdamgr farm. The aeurta jurisdicmn ta aﬁaw such am apphmticn is talcaan away unima thaa wnéithzsrxs. precedent the:-eﬁar are sa*5mﬁ&, v'm.§ it must mama to 3. mnciusmn twt in apim nf due the

-MKWW mwvmm WW mmmwmammm -. ~ W353" wgwywma Mm" Wmmmwmamﬂwﬁ wmmw wwwmk wm ﬂwwmmwmamwwm an-mu mwwmw ww aMa1:'I|:\|IIm"'1nan*wua .. "W H 38 afcer the trial aftha case 21% cemmerwaﬁ, rm applicatinn sf pleadirg shali ha aliowad unlcss the above muirmma: is saﬁafiad. mmied em: 5 Ruﬁe 3:: was am ram ﬁnn of the Law *3a&.is$iGI¥::Bi1ié:§:é "" é mam (sic: Rule} 1?, as it ex_i_5$:e c_i pri:3f" amssndmcent, was invnked ' { 7 in aalaying that mix. "thcrn V' litigaﬁen anﬁ spew 'dispésal' amndmsnt was maﬁa fag" 1999, éalcsting Ri1Ei"1'?"'«.,ﬁ*a:§x:§"made. This Pmceduraa Qacie ' 2%, provision 3}1£2'€;¥:. _ .V the pcrwer mndmmt, :;1 §.§l1§it£x'£:i.ax1 which is acldeacl to the rulcz. The d,;¢taiia' will gr; ta ahcw as :9 fag£a ~:;si" prment cam Show that _f£ii3.¢_ am aaught to % raiaeci by , _ '-.3:-vf' mt by the appeﬂanta Wm Well " -- zummge an may wurt me; am: {baa ﬁ af (111.3 éiﬁgazme an the % sf the appelianm ﬁsezzﬁtﬁrg them an 4-4. Apyrlyixg flu: iaw Iaﬁ éazswn 9.3 afarmaircl by tha Apex C:::ur1:3 in tha irmtant aase, it cammt m said that in aging ef ﬁilﬁ ﬁiligarwe, the §}s.i+:1t§ﬁ' amukd mt have raimeé;

E § 3 mm sown we I-u*.w"<utIur"\ lei *5 mm Wgrmamu ww wmmmmnmﬁﬂ ar-mum mwumﬁ wr wmwnmwa WWW #'..'CmEé'§" QB" mmmmm MGM cmm? Q5' 3?

tha ecntantiona which she now" swim ta raise by Way of t csf hm plain: and so: 3133 the such, it is toes late in the day for arm plaintiﬁ" ts ms:

45. 'I115: Eeaxﬁ far: ':

brcmght ts thy: new of made on sat}: by the " at the mmmcnmmm: ar& }',2m % in CtS.Ne. 6?1}'1989 am evidexwe 2;; ahcw that iiﬁﬁwﬁﬁiéérztiﬁ' itsezf reveals that the having became the ewxier rzaf' variezzus sale cicada and gift cams; "men if 3a;s§C144a%.pp1ica'ufGzI gar additianai evidenvse i;j5'§£r:s:'§j§5_j':'.~¢;2s&i1c<:l,__;;r¢t, en the hams of the wry plraadirm -sf ' the Hie}. smart arxﬁ the Eﬁczzlar atanci . " tlfigéﬁiefcnziazit iizsrelf was suﬁkzzieznt far am plaintiﬁ' wliiasiag ﬁzz" zxseczaessary nt m the p

- «, a;é''~¥V¢V3:3 as thas prayar hefcsre the trial court itaelf sum} mt to ;raise the said issue wim the matiaer has ﬁksed this ' snags, aﬁer a bag batik' As auch, the appﬁcatian ﬁm by the piaizziziﬁ saefszirg nt 5f the p as well as 22 E?

x W. WWW W mmmmm mm &.;.i€.§ﬁ%.MW cw mmmmm mm mm?" W mRM&Y&?='%ii'»:E?<:= tha prayer crarxzxct be pcsrmitmd at this stage bamuae, tha §3aiz1¥;E§ has faiieci ta shew that dwpibe due on her part, she oeuki mt mine 313:2}: the:

hula} cxaurt.

46. E23121-1 sides Pmve (iii: 3 n§.::::x:i;?:s_a e§:* 'A which have Ema _'B1.;¢' the suhstanﬁal g.:£;f:a»i:1er&t:iz:r1 as abet» and 'zgrumcmam-y for this court m 'Q? damzlsions as the upon the facts and in the ﬁace of the pzeagzmgg in the ﬁmtant aaaa and. in the pmding an the part ef the thsc vzzidnms 91' than: registared sale % gift ﬁends am; the plainﬁg failing m seal: 3 ' grayazf % fer dawla:":i1:g the said dmzmmts bairg null or 33:1 the akmmﬁw £32? ﬁon sf the saié V V A and therew mt b an the piaintiﬁ', and i:r£a1.e::rur¥: aha mt ﬁi any issues with-

ﬁardiathmsasmtsmxtjzﬁxﬁinggivvenbythetrialazzurt craxzyev§ﬁ&zmec0:1s£tim~wbyt§1e'£riaiaaurtwI:ici':az-3 1 aka ummmwma «M W Q x Wm." "WWW mwwm$ war mmmmmwwozmm mum imwwm mar mammimm mam mmm Q?' %ﬁﬁ?%£Mm%l3*i~:'.,;=I'*~'ie.

2009 AB? SC?! 335?', £79 submit that Mme ms c::::u1't3 hsalzirw have xwrdeci a mnmxrxmxt an faczits, in second appeal, mnnst intmtfcm anti tbs mamiai asp if tlxﬁa cnurt in sitting as 6;;

facts. I ham carefully gcm $9.?' the apwz Court azﬁ it hgta in ism-femme with any % is km:

permmibze an and such mwrfermma wmm formulating gf = is by the Ap-mt Court is qm%:;;;mr% with aoncu;-rent, mum' cf iazﬁ {if wii}. aim-e enly after ﬁormuiabkan cf ﬁiimtiszzza ef Essay, but mt smmwmc. The Apex:

at paragraph» 113 sf' the _§u§w-531$. that the " in may in i21terf&r1";rg with $135 mam' éf warm mm I8?§' whm the savanna A 5.' did meet inmhze any qzzaaﬁﬁzrz cf law, mucmms any ﬁubatanm 1 qumtaclaxz. sf Eat». The same view" is aim rcitmatad by rafmérirzg to me dacision sf Dharam Smglfs Er' .. W, .. »...-...y H ?_,..wjww..m 'um mwwmawmﬁmlwﬂ mum muwmﬁ KM" KAKMAYAKA Eﬁﬁﬂ KQHRV Q? KARNATﬁ.K& MGM mmzm 0% 411 msztzside the mrametars sf tha pleadings <::»f the mrtim and the iaaum raiswg cannot be ﬁver; any £mpoz1:_;axx:e ané. vanes thﬁ aaid fzmzliztw 9.1% the reasom ths trml" cmurt are diaaarded} what $633333. 3 remv tbs: p£ead..ir1gs of the parﬁm "'£.i:e_ >a;;f:1;;gi'1u§c ]i:?:r» the plaintzﬁaxxd the d:::m1m in shew that tha suit properties in am E.a@ﬁs partims and p}ainﬁﬁ' a1j§é :«£s:&:a mm. But, mutt fczelicwm mc path led marzrmr ohiiviaua tn the that $3 mad and the right that is ciagimgﬁ in 121% cerantaxt $1' the aclmitted 4';*%&A%%%%Ejtefe:ee I mm to the am sf rm gudmmas, it is v m 2-eﬁer 15:: tm éecﬁimn af the ﬁspmz Cczurt as the aamgae ef sacrm 100 sf the SIRE! The mama} 562* the respandent Shri mimh R.U;Jpin refmred is a ﬁwéssisn $1' the apex Sour: in the mag of Nw-aggmrmaz Reyiéndm Vs. Lekse% Samjim; remrtecl in 1%?:'5"$$r§"°'§«""'$ !L_.E!:t'1"\a.M it emmevn _ V_,..<.,'.....,.M Wm wwmmawmﬂmmm Wswm mwwmﬁ war m.m€NM"£'ﬁW% Wﬁééﬁ mum" Q? %&ﬂM&¥&%4% mm»-a amm" Q? mmammm. Hiﬁﬁ «£3 cage at paragaph-51 and also at paragraph-54 art' the ﬁudgent.

49. The eﬁact 9:' the aformaid Apm: Cam": 11s that tha High the C.P.C., uamwt disturb . "

Witltwut formuhtizg instant case, summmia: 5:9 been 5;-ma:

ms; at the time: or aamnd appeal and aim: in the the light ef the scniar etruxw;-.1 for ma. facmzg it may aim: be key: in f_§}a£.'{€£}':é3_' in the ease cf Kashmir Sing}: Vs. % %% s.2zgr:;, in mm Am saw 241:; has alga *- czirmmtarxszses Ilﬂﬁfkf Whiszh the Hﬁgh Ceurk can in szawmé appeal agaizmt ﬂea mmsurr-321% .. cf facet and thaw ciraumtarmas GI' exmptiona are "(Ag Tm: gazmsl mks is that High Smart Win mt i:£1fJ5I'f¢£'¢ with the wzmxnmt ﬁnding ef the Caurm beisw. But it is not an absciuta nth. <3/W;

MWMW It E<e:*\\M n mfmﬁhmwknwm MM § :

5%;

Q 2 Q § I3 § 3 § L3 3 § 3 § § g g % § § 3 § 3 3 3 :

§ :

§ § :

?

E E E 2 3 2 3 E muwzwvt Scam at' the well r excaptians are mm ii) the warts behaw have "@;nm:ec'_£_.___t1'1e material eviciezme: er ma an rm the courts have érawn wmng proved mm by appiying the Q 9:' (iii) the canrm haw u af' preef. 'Dacision basaﬁ-:.AcI:§" é«.rid;r§¥1<3¢'As»AA%&:aa:;%z{j only msana eases t:¥'i1:e_.;fe aj.

ef cvicierwc, but aisﬁ tn:"'an§*T¢éas.é,§, the eviclerice,-=' whbie, is net masanabgz 63' the ﬁnding.'*

53. r&. :33: questian of Law is V. :s3mu*tu'dz1g aubatantial quae:f¥:Es$ : df d by the Apm: Caurt in the vmy :

" fj'5:(E3}_ '1":-5 "'¥a»g=_....'fg.2.;i:;sstaxwra1' a quwtzimi ef mt? must ri§é;ha.tab£e, not prevmusly aattied by law of 1 92* a b1n:i' ing t, must have m@ an 'ﬁlm éwzsian cf the me, '~ armweraﬁ eriiher way; inse&r aa the righm af t§2ae@émb%x'ei'£aremrwr:§d. Ta baa qumt.-ion cf kw 'inwlvirg in tile saw' there must ha frat a. fauzzadaﬁan fer £t }aid in tha pieadizw and 122% quaeticn ahoizki emmge {mm tbs: sustairaabb fmxslfrm af fact arrivad at by Cam": 9:' facts semi it must be zmtpwaary ta rs :

at ;

$3 dmide that qumtimtt at' law far a. just am! prayer dacﬁaiam of the cam. an paint mam ﬁat the firm: am befcre L3'}3? '§': i,3',11 Quart ia mat a qumﬁwn invuived unlaasa it 30% 'iii? the mat of the A It b themforse, depmad Q31?' V eircumtarmm at' each ma at' law is a substantial saw, or net; cm:-trail mmidﬁrgﬁm _ W judicious _in<:'1ispe:msab}4: abligatinn smgm and proiongatzixm in """ ' qﬁéﬁon cf Law will aiso in aimassum, where the legal __»:.?,Al'ié»'-$1.3'; an aacztzunt of axprm _ 'V gf or hénding pre::nedanm,, but the has decided. the matter, either

-- or actirg ¢ana'a::'y ta: auch lagal in tlfhﬁ semnci tygc ef mam, the z égiﬁstaaﬁal quwtian cf law Maw mt because {ﬁe law gs max: aemmbxe, ma bananas the ciﬁaﬁczsn myéﬁ an a matwial qumtion, vlzuiaﬁes the settﬁa pwiﬁen sf law.

The suhnstaxxhhl quwtinn of law on which as«m21ciappm13ha1Ibaeh%:t:1aec:1z"mt IE3;

xx !§H.""§§t5.""$z"""$sz FI....£;I:,"*'M§..Is <mm.wms»A...wn.\\m WWW WW; W mmmwwsmmm mm mmm W mmA'm.m mam mww W mammm MW?-H nwsarﬂy be a sulzetantial quwtian of law at' gmmai imwtance,"

52. Thus, an wnaidcraﬁan ef the W 21:15 Apm: coma: in tlm .aforemsen*t:'o:mé.V,; i «am that mm the mum hs;sé¢7 ef pmtof, like in the mm: mean whaera the czouxm haw fadzs by appiyingv whawe the evidmwe takczn as capable cf m by this mg; % "beoemaa inmitabla and substantial qumtions sf law garagpapha, 1 am; 31' the name we 3 gm ma gm gumfm in denzrreeirzg the amilw ts ecturt 5&0 wmm1'ttaci tha szmﬂa' ' r §§i".!'8X* the ﬁz1dT@ af the wig} mart, As such, .. t.;I3__ae at' 23% warm mm rmd 129 ha sat aaide.

3%' aammm. mx..m."m

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court