Karnataka High Court
Sri Ninga Shetty vs Sri Sidda Shetty on 12 October, 2011
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao
Bench: K.Sreedhar Rao
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE, DATED THIS THE 127 DAY OF OCTOBER, 201 i ube . : : BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SREE 1 Je IAR R AO (T PETITION NO: 27737/2010 (GM-CPC) oS SRL NINGA SHETTY. AGE: 81 YEARS, . | om 8/O.LATE NINGA SHETTY 2.1) IAMAIAH 'SHETTY, R/AT.BANTAR ATHALALU VILLA GE, oo HALLYMYSORE HOBLI. : HOLENARASIPURA TALUK,. HASSAN DISTRICT. . ma, (PETITIONER IS. NOT CLAIMING BENEFIT OF SEN iOR crn IZEN}.. | PETITIONER (BY SRI N, SHANK CARA NARI AYANA BHAT, ADVOCATE) AND I. SRPSIDDA SHETTY, "AGE: 71 YEARS... _ $/O.LATE NINGA SHETTY @ THAMAIAH SHETTY, . R/ATUBANTARATHALALU VILLAGE, HALLYMYSORE HOBLL _ HOLE JARASIP URA TALUK, "HASSAN DISTRICT, "2. SREBASAVA SHETTY : AVGES 51 YEARS, ~...8/O.LATE NINGA SHETTY @ THAMAIAH SHETTY R/AT. BANTARATHALALU VILLAGE, HALLYMYSORE HOBLIE SAN HOLENARASIPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT. oe RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI R. NATARAJ, ADVOCATE) SO THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF | THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WITH A PRAYER (ro CAL. FOR RELEVANT RECORDS AND QUASH THE ORDER OF | THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JDUGE: (JR.DN) .& UMEC.. HOLENARASIPURA IN FDP NO. 8/69 DTP. 24.05.10 MARKED AS ANNEX-D IN THIS WP. AND. GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE OPERATION AND EXECUTION OF THE ORDER OF THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) & GMPC, HOLENARASIPURA IN FDP NO.3/09 DTD 24.05.10 MARKED'AS ANTIEX-D IN THIS W.P. PENDING DISPOSAL OF THE ABOVE W.PLAND ETC.
The petitioner is the.defendant. The respondents - plaintifis led a suit. fer declaration and permanent injunction against the petitioner in respect of Sy.No.22 Mysore Mobili, Holenarasipura Taluk. Hassan District.
2, dv the said suit, it was found that the property is a _. joint property of the plaintilf and the defendants. Therefore.
*. this.Court in R.S.A.No.649/ 1995, directed the division of the Bp BA ad u said properties in equal share declaring 1/3 share to. the plaintlf and detendants each.
3. The plaintiff has filed FDP proceedings for division of the properties by metes and bounds. The petitioner ~ defendant objected FDP proceedings on the or ound tbat. there are some other properties OF, the family which have not been taken into consideration ms for partition in R.S.A.No.649/1995. It is farther subniitred that the sister is also one of the LLRs and 'she is not » party to the suit in question. As . such, the 7 sister has fied ai suit in O.S.No.41/09. 6it.the Ble cf the Civil Judge (Jr Dn) a Holenarasipsur iur.partition. and possession and in the said suit, all the family propeérties including the preperties in question is thé subject matter. The petitioner therefore, i submiis that the PDP proceedings should not be continued 'unul disposai.ofthe suit filed by the sister. The trial court : RAERO PRI TELE Q has 'rejected the contention and appointed the Tahsildar for _», dividing*the properties. The petitioner aggrieved by the said ercers tas Niecl Unis writ petition.