Karnataka High Court
Kishor S N S/O Suryanarayana vs Suryanarayana S/O Dodda Muni on 14 July, 2011
Author: B.Sreenivase Gowda
Bench: B.Sreenivase Gowda
L IN THE HIGH SOUR'? OF KARNATAKA AT BAN§AL(3RE BATED THIS THE 141% DAY' CF JULY, 20: BEFGRE " '' THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE B.sREENIv;égsE:§(i#i2:i;§.
Regular Second AppeaI:N6V.":293" £)F.:
BETWEEN E? SE Kishor, S/0. Suryana:*a}zana, Aged about 20 3,<;:é;:"s.
23 Smt.T.K,KaI1aka._Ra1tr1na.., W'/0.S1;1<§z3nare;_yan3;'€.: " L' Aged aE)Qu}:'L4VG yttafsf Both a.ré-.r;§Vsid§flg :3§'ii.i ~ '§';' VB€g§i:;'u ' Ne1aT:naI1;.g{211,3Q'T a'?.«=.;k,., __ -- ' Bangalcre §7§1iI"é;1« _.D°E~st1:%i<:'t.
» K1 é Alfifieliants (Bf; Srif Nfijgaiagia 8: Sr}; R D Parzchang Aévj xi A. H ' Sé1';f§%'5r:3.€:fa3f3.::a% 359 E'.1§déa Mun: 3 5} ysars, 'T 33:23 Lakghmammag
-- '%?s?;"Q, éayaraznsgahg Ag*e§ 5:3 }f$?}:fS.
W ' " n ma"
Mzzairafigappa, K») S;'!'{)e L316 Chikkaveerappa, g%_§€d €32 y€a1}"S, A1} are rasidéng at:
Lagumaaahalii 'sfiflagé, Bidarahaili Habii, Bangaiore Sauth "Fah;::,_ Ré';5p§nd€ntsV {By Sri. M, A. v;§'§é:§)astié¥fi,: zV'$,1f,_'&};"~f<').r R.'1;'R;'3.} This RSA :3 fileéé <mg- a:.p<: against the judgment ans} _d.e<:1'éé'--{is.t€<1'._31;}Q;'20O9§ passed in R,A,No.:49;2@«::»'3, éénitfié "fi§é'~.'Uf__..fih€ Fri' District & Sessionsr. B"a:uf;gé}ore" Rural District, Bangalere, partly afiowing the _gipfpF:}2tivA~fi1é;iV"against the judgment and d€~cr,e_€§*Vjdai'€:4i.4;--3.2_O(}8"--p.as3S€d in OgS;N0A/681/1998 on fi1eA"c§£th'e:«.£ Ada}: Civil Judge {Sr.Dn) Bangaiore Rural _Di3_triC_i§ 'EZ',flg..3VI(3%1:'é Tfi:::_ app éa_1V%;.:;;i11fi'iL:g on for Final d.isp0saL this day, pgpirt uelgfcfred Qlgxfi/kn§:N T V 1 s:§e§.an§ appeal 5.3 by tbs plaintiffs Chalienging {E16 §::<'~<§e:}'i.::é:1'i aad eiscrfie af éhs 1s::v;€z' ap§€}ian'; {_"';@:1§"£ '*2:
AA in é1§}_{fiVing Eha Rfiguiar Apgaai pfefsrzfié by €216 "é_sff§:n<:§anis in pas"? and :::sd§f§'§r:g {ha jufigsmartst am? Hééecrss passéci' by éha Trig} Gear: ih€r€'8j; {iésyeeéngf the suii Cf {E26 §§€}.§§1;{§f§S @333? its r5%Spe<:%i of §;%"'S§ piairyiziff Eéédéag ihat he is; €§i'§§§€§ fa? E233? sham in mg: yéaini, éefendant it: Gfdéi' to §;€§I'§E?€ thts Eegitirilate shzzié pi3.i:3t:tfs in the Suit prt>p€rties hag sxézeztgtéfi tft:3.;:§t-"S235 H :
deedg 9:1 L332-EO-98 in f8.V€§t1,:" of §:£éf€%12fiat':tS Qi-':2-;:1§;':ig thay are not binding? an tbs ptai"i1tité§3." Hté'n_:cEé:.,'. Constrained to file a Suit t¢f::t~h§ fiief 1pg.1't§Vt§Gt;'jand " V séparate p0sS€ssi<m and fgr. }fia::c.e1}atié12.._§f_:tt:€ Sale deeds and for mesne } .4
5. D€fend33.fit':{:'ha<t._ fiietig statement admitting with the first «:ief€n{i'éLtit§~'t§§Vftt:::Jié%;1i'a. at 1:116 instance of the Ssconef_«pi$:nttff'::'V"a:Vgfiértion at the property was said t'0ru'tt--kit€vv ptu_rpA'Q$e..."~7Cf family nscessity and the C0:1LéiCi,g:*atVtQ:: Afeceived was used ts: construct a fatm .h®.t;s<:>_ at fléggumetéahailt and as Sash, 883$ éssds ara piaintiffs anti they have denied 9:116?
aa§é't3inet1ts"'V'0f the 3:223:32: and they hays ssught tbs"
a%%.3:nisS'al 95 the Emit.
'Eitte 't§"§8.l Cfiurt an the Eastg if ths péeaéingg at the §art/:53 arzd déisiifiifintfi §::t}dt::::£:Ct by tthetsi hag framsfi the ft>§O'2}».7i§Eg igssttés. :
UK ij 'ififhéthsr piaizaiiffé prsve iihaé '{i€:»:;' defer1d3.nt has dfiséried :h§:HMpEain:i;ié»-- bffmt: mgnth sf EQQ4 and Started "Iiv«%:1§_§A mZ€h" .§:is'--..'.» brethsfs heuse at Lagum€:na§'1é:17f'i as AA in thé plaint?
ii) 'iJv'h€ther plaintiff §YOV'€§»,ffi3t they €i--€r";*1ai':_d€Wd the :nai:1f:er:ar1g:<: and_....sI:e_E'i;5:: frOm__ih<~:{? 159% éefendantfi but,_ti*:\e 13 dVéLfs;:dL2a.f:t reftiséd to providé :1ecessa;ryT'£11é:iI§;~i€:né:r3.b':'M and shsiter as alleged i::1:h€_;V:)Iai:1i? ' V 1
iii) RV};1eth<{r :;1ip1é.i1f1wtf;f '" pf{2ve'= *t.h.?§t the guit sc:h-;=:t':11:§}eV "'p:'*1Qps:27}f;ig§s._ 3.:*€5}:':1V€» ancsstral geint family 'pr;:)p€1*-';i€s"T'*a:':_di 'ih:2i: the piaintiffs are vV'é:i'1':i~'£I_¢1;l "-«:1'a.i1'"£>,. partition and saparate 7 p0ss€Ss.:iQ:1 "as alléged. in the plant'?
iv} V\f1'1"€fl'1*F.31" 'it--hé".Vi:1€fE:--ndé.nts pmve that the 211* _ _p1aihfiffh§:rs€:--1fh'as deserted the F4 plaintiff . and ta"1k:e:1 av»;-*a,y the L3? plaintiff and living at " i.3::€1"~~-- zpare::tS"°h0use as contended in 'aha _ w:fi*:i;€-:1 statement'?
" %?§r"'}5§:th{%f'V..th€ defemdanis prove that the 2% pEai:'i:iiff is Waking and shéé i3 getting z "'::f10 1?1i:h1y incense sf RS§2,,GO@/~ as ceniended i;3 éhe written Statement?
" W"ha*: ifeiief fihe: §'ia§at§§fs am Qiziififié? vié} WE135: ::;r§€:' aad §€C§"€S? '? Piainiiffs 35:: supperi Qi éiheitt C836 hays sxaminsaé €336 S€C€if§§. piaintiff as; 9W: 2 am éhéy havs pmé.:;€€:f: as mggy as 5:3 ée<:m':::€:/gig which were maiked 35; §:>:3a?.E