late Abdul Gafoorsab by
the plaintiff. There was no oral gift nor the said gift was acted
upon. The suit Initiated by defendants ... committed a serious error in coming to
the conclusion that the oral gift Is proved because of those
Instances. Therefore, the said finding is perverse
equally bound
by the decree passed thereon. A decree which is validly
passed, confirmed by the Appellate Court cannot be stayed in
a proceedings initiated ... plaintiffs in the said suit are not parties
and believing an oral gift to be a prima facie case of title,
without finding out whether
Trial Court on appreciation of the
aforesaid oral and documentary evidence on record held
29
: 30 :
the plaintiffs have failed to prove the genealogy
furnished ... proved that the
deceased Gurubasavva executed a Registered Gift Deed
dated 19.03.1964 gifting CTS No. 2889, 2891 and 2892
and rights
Trial Court on appreciation of the
aforesaid oral and documentary evidence on record held
29
: 30 :
the plaintiffs have failed to prove the genealogy
furnished ... proved that the
deceased Gurubasavva executed a Registered Gift Deed
dated 19.03.1964 gifting CTS No. 2889, 2891 and 2892
and rights
gift.
She was in a sound state of mind till she gifted the property
under Mohammadan law. Plaintiffs are aware of the oral
evidence. They ... consideration of the aforesaid
oral and documentary evidence on record held that the
plaintiffs have proved that the alleged oral gift deed relied
Sri Aralappa Son Of Sri Chowrappa, Major vs Sri Jagannath Son Of Late Sri Chikka
S. Jagadish vs Dr. S. Kumaraswamy Since Dead By Lr'S ... on 20 March
Siddaramappa And Ors. vs Smt. Gouravva on 9 December, 2003
Equivalent citations: AIR2004KANT230, ILR2004KAR3611, AIR
Sri. Venkatanarayanappa S/O ... vs Sri. Siddappa S/O Venkatappa on 8 February, 2007
Equivalent
Maheboobsab Buransab Maniyar vs Mohadinsab Maheboobsab Maniyar on 12 January, 2012
Equivalent citations: AIR 2013
