In view of that, the decisions
112 OS.3151/2004
relied upon by the learned counsel for the defendants
No.1 to 4, 6 and 7 in B.Manjunath Prabhu, Joyce Primrose
Prestor Nee Vas and Mohan Lal's case (supra) are not
applicable to the facts of the case on hand.
In view of
law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vineeta
Sharma's case (supra), when the daughter is held to be
coparcener by birth and when the suit properties are
coparcenary properties, the provisions of Karnataka
Hindu Law Women's Rights Act, are not applicable to the
facts of the case and therefore, the decisions relied upon
by the learned counsel for the defendants in Annamma as
168 OS.3151/2004
well as L.Gowramma's case (supra) are not applicable to
the facts of the case on hand.