Karnataka High Court
Ladsab S/O Honnursab Yelburgi vs Rajasab S/O Honnursab Yelburgi on 5 December, 2008
Author: N.Kumar
Bench: N.Kumar
And:
Her THE HIGH ¢::oUR'r or KA.RHAT£a§*f.A c:RCUI'i*':E:::,§'.f-fittxi AT DHAREEFAD Dated this the 5"" zéay of Decemb{:r_, 2:E}QE§VA.T.:" 3 B:~_2;1'«-'0R}§: » T J T THE Hmwzm MR» _J$8'§"!{§E H. 1{t:.::.§A;R" V Wm Petimfon N0. 122943-oi' 2005. fuM";.:ci5Q} Between:
Lac}.-sab -- VA ' S/0 Hoxmursab AYelb1:11fgi _ 'v Aged about 5? «§:¢a3's ' Occ: AgxiCu1Vt%_;ri$i'L'V' _ _ RIO Dotihal Kustagi .V f ' ' * (By i'(;3: S3:_i Malipatii, V _ Va"Efii?,?f0i3r'if€AE§) " _. Rajasab' " u V' / 0 H'c}an:;_1i"::.21§b Yeiburgi .~ Aged §bo1i¥ '4};' jgrears '-Oct)': Pglicvc: Co1:1sfita1:_)1e Ego l._3:3.tiI1.:':ii~. " V Workiiag at '§~it;kai100r P<::r}ice--..S£atia.m_ 'Ye1burga1"31uK 7 S,/2G~HO.i1Ilu1Sab
-. fXgt::--Ci about 30 years ';<.haja..g;a§55eersab _0cc§: Agricuiturist . ':2'/o Otihal Taluk ' V ' A .. u jfwibuxgi Kushtagi . . . Petitiszmer 8 Mehabubbi W] 0 Musbafa Aged about 42 years R,' 0 Baiaganoor Taluk Sindhanoor 4 Amcerbi .
W/0 Osmanasab Nadtfimésni Aged ab-ant 45 years "
Dec: Househoid R] 0 Dotihal Taiziii Kxzstagi " " ,_..Responden3:S (By 333: c:1au;c:r:§s;aeka;:,P. imvocazeg 'Fhis:Writ }.?"€:tifio11_is.fEiédi;.nt:ier Articles 226 and 22?' of the C()3'1E§.'E;i1_il}:ii(;i}I1.':{Zf..§I1{fi£:i,_'pt'&}'iITl\g to quash the sxfler dated I,8~7--22VOO6 passcé in _N0.?";' 2001 on the file of Civil Judge (J Z'. if)Ii:) , Kustagh -.v:i;ir: }%--r;:ieXura~}<'. "£'hiS-- f_W1:i.1; on fin" pmlimmary E3,€aring in 'B' grogp this 9133?,' thefloiirt made the fofilowingz Q R D E fl 'i"i14é".gb§e'::§T:ifi:3'i1er has challenged in {his Writ Petition the carder the trial Ceuxt directing 3335 cf the praperty in ' "":¢I*ms {::f.Secti0n 3 ofthe Paliifion Act. b' H 2. 'The prztitioner filed the suit 13:31" partitien and separate hyjjbssession emf his 1/ 4'31 shares: in the suit Schcdule pmpefiy. Tbs suit is deemed. in the final decree proceedings :9:
cammissioner was appomted to <:::{fect a p¢<ia"f:é.ii§n;i_l Fhe commissioner has submitted his report. Itiéis 4gi'.:'€:'I1 ._a pmposal that towards 1/41111 Sh31"é>;;)f'1§1€i"'p€fifi(€I|_i1€I,j¥'(:tti%{fl,- 1 L.-#4 padasala and Gpen space is :given; __ '1;i3§: o£E1¢r_ ti"11*€'& vbfdtiiérs can Cflflvfifiififlflfig enjoy the other brothers have viiigti ohjéc: '"'i"h<; after aztonsifiering the rivai "4.{3vL*)'?_£..i$,s:'.fi'.£-!",J'l;;fi,?VLS cozramissiorxefs report has cerium-;::ta:1_ 'property cannot be paxtifionedg. i1zi'tn__iE;~;§£1;'--_VC§:>¥);y*¢:%_ii:;¢::1péfittiqzgg to be €:11j0ye£i by each of the }has ordereci for gait: of the entire G1? the Paxfitiou 2'-'kct. Aggrieved by the saéiii40r:ive.f;"pés'i;§i1e3fi§.r has preferreti this Wflt Petition. £,§ar;1e§fi i:miJi1se1 for the petitioner submits that, in "i_t{)Vx'£3"!iif?gACF£D€i' 1/-filth share is déckared. As per the skcizch hi-1 has e n§§h__3-s.é5:<3 11:; the Writ Petifion, if 3 room, a paciasala, apex; given ta him towarcis his 1/431 sham, he is also pay the diifcmncc in price and his sénfimeni to i the anczzstrai property is satisfied. Decree is also a "Séitisfied and them is no necessity to effect the 3511:: of the property as ordered by the Court below.
4. If tlm parties is the suit agree t11€:r¢'"is But if one of fhem insist that gas}; shfoiihd' i€;q41;.23l'L'f<§«ii1*?.
::;onv€m}en,t shares, the Court has { '£.C:. Ciéiflifiifij'xVh€;f3E3,éi; .:th€ ' pmperty can be ciivideé __f0u1V'a 't=.c'1fua1' because the plaintiffk suit is \:fE:a1"" that does £101": mean: that om}; to be Cazved out. The c:1:11:ii:lc¢:n3.e:1t of parties is not in dispute. Each ?%**'w%#hare. if the property is dividad j;«'~:, '€x1é»'t possible to enjoy the vUnc¥e1' these circumstances, the ()I}}V.;§',?a{;V)'i:}.*--_"i<)VI1'I§i."I;.» is to 01133: tbr an auction, i.e., the sale of fjite fiiiéier Secticm 3 ofthe Paztifien Act. in u offhe 1V'1fV1at'tt3'r',V the ozder passéd is legal and vaiid and dd' any i}:lt€I'f€I't:I1CC. .Hen.ce, fhff psiition is disfiiisseé.' ' Q I
-- --N