ll 11:: man noun or Iumumuu xr *
DATED um um 2o"'mv or A} E L
1-an uonrnun %& jg « E E E
R.F.A.No.aos;;99E" V
BETWEEN: E
1 SUBRAYAMN " '
AGED ABOUT 53 YEA'RS;~.4
S./0.LA'l'E NARAYANA,'-, E
KANOOR vj{L1,AaE,
\.'I!2!'.;JPE.¢'F'E';5;§JL!!{',~. ,
Kona.uu..__ " APPELLANT
(By S11:--T-NTR;!{Gi¥i:§PKTj}:iY:V' " )
AND :
1 ,
V .AGED'}'aB0'FJ'F 55. YEARS,
, s;~a.:.A.'r;=;AA e_I..'.9..'a;*.'.¢".-'.54
R.fD.HOR'PlCI'i'i'ifiIRE FARM
miyimifirab,
" ..§_(c§I)AGU.
2} M.:N}KNfi{N111AIAH,
51' YEARS.
5,1 .|\!.A.R.A.Y.A.!\!A
BRAHMAGIRI PAI,
V II.llI"ll'l'.I I;-r\r\Ar-ul
2 l\1'\I'1Jl\, I\.\JIJl'I.\J'L-V.
' Ni.N.LINGAPPA,
2"!
49 VFMRS,
Si 0.LA'TE NFhRfi'Y'fifiF\,
OPPSYNDICATE BANK,
THHWHMWH,
KODAGU.
4.
S[0.LA'!'E NARAYANA;
47 "
KALLUFIANFI,
VIRA.JPETTALUK,~._ -
KODAGU. M '*.»;vR'ESPONDENTS
(av sen: G 3 KANE! IR mflfian :1; J1. ~
"I'\l_ll¢'.\. tin ii'?! it 11¢ a... ti "mv:.r.r*~ Anninovn mu
I "IE, L', I: '9' ~_':' '.1! '.' I1'..Jr\II'I:,I ' fl
JUDGMEN3?' Ants.» !)ECl~E_F__.'E~~. A33. 10.98 PASSED IN
n.s:.r~io.aoisfa6--ii.r;ii rm (--;«.~%-wi. .iiinGF;_, (5-'ifi.i')I'v'.')
WRAJPET,.'DECREE-lN€} THE sutmvpon mnrmon AND
SEPARA'l'E_ Possaasiofi... %
mm; «min. abs hearing and for
_§11c1ga_Ln1cnt;'Lt_4l1isaVvdaa1_y_ 'CO}1.l't delivered the ibllowing:
.l'lII')flEI!I'I'
.. ..
...._....................................
'Fifi. ]l'\.£
. "_"_«...__._n 1___ ...1__ .1__¢-__ _I___4._ :___ 1"': a n1_ __. ¢1__
'I Dy THC uclfinuanffl 111 'Ju35vIVOaU'J] 90 0 I1 -
VViZ!:5a¢yii__Jx{;ti'§c (Sr. 011.) Vimjpct. is din.-.c~.ted against the
jtldgmcfii decree. dated 30.10.1993 wherein the suit
the puainufla 3 and 4 has been doomed by holding
\_9-J*
that plaintiflb 3 and 4 are entitled to 1/3-vi shame
suit schcduh pmpcrtisus.
2. The essential facts of thtycagie
appeal with reference: to the of '
tflalmtutamasflnflowgz _ vv
Plaintiflb 1 to 4 the file.-. of
. (.-_,q1;.) Vitttitnct pomflon .n...d.
;...,.....=.... 1:95 the pia'iti's.i'.fi"s and
for mean: pmperuca' . Schcsciuie
pmpctrtv N_o,5§ in Sy.No.69/69.
t'*
nine-rt-I-ed ~
,-.--e_.-.,.. :1-._. V4J.II.:' p....... ....at ,.............., !.I&.I.V.I.
def-.':--a:;daflt are iii':-1 A acufifit
pf iatc Narayana. The fitthcr of the pl'aintifl's
was possessing md enjoying the
as his self-acquitted property. Namyann
daughters by name M.N.Gangam1na and
who an: mam'ed and Inn' 'ng in their
\-D
\}/J
husband's place. The father of the plaintflf and he
developed the schedule property and t
The schedule property is _
tn"l}n1In and nnnniruul ht! lulu Mn:-n1rnn';'.':
J 4"oI-'V-1 I.
VoIIuMu'&V-' I-Flul-I'-I» I-Y'-'I-'Inf.-In-I1-'Val 1'!-'V'-I-LI..'l.I-I.Ili.'_' 1-! V 91 -In-I-I ' 'nI'U'U' -I-I. I'-3-H-I-Ml '.'
and he waits? inifnfuired the snot
contributed anything temagds fiie the
life time of mu: of land in
Sy.No.69/5 (9. enjoyment and
since it it yezfgiéot granted in his name
and the land was contributed
kinds and other properties
am .he "he is .1-.e fii-1'15: 9.
A.'I__ _I__.4. I'I'I_.!._4_!JI_ 0'! ____'I A _____ _______I__!_._.
tn¢.»}Jv§I.flIliEu3 mu}-uemlutunt. ruuulma -3 anti -r wen: wvrlung
No.3 is retired from the Army in the
plainfifl tetixed fmm the Army in the
l9
trying to me the entire plnint schedule
income thereof in wasting and K
has been trvm__ ' g to cmea. -te false
'Iuu.-A- !.iv'L.'.n.I. Ann. 1'-In-5 I-I'!-uVI.=
@m eLeI.I:here. En saith n H-I-I-t. the
t}.ia:-fir fiiie share iii the is
further avern.-xi that 1' id "t1}ieinnte the
therefrom. It 3 and 4 are
entitled to ;1"f"§'.'i"!'V schedule properly
with the pmmed to that I.-.fi'ect
and ztieene profits.
_ 4, 'm»: aiiit 1€asA'ieeieted by the defendant by filing the
V' relationship between the plaintiffs
was admitted. It is averted in the written
Statement' it is utter false to suggest that during the life
I'-3-rung I;-F rnflnnr nwnuruinn kn run!'-1-I nmi an-I-Int: II'. 1 (115-nn_'n~I"
'..Inl-I-"a" -15.55' Il".I.I'..'-I !.1..l.I.1JI.1.I..Il.1. W ,1. I
SIy.I'io.69i5C2 and it' was in possession and
enjoyment. It is also false to suggest that the income derived
W
V' ' 63.";
out of the said land was oontflbuted towmds
fund. It is incorrect to suggest that all the
__v __.
er.-.1!'-;a.t_u.1I.t1.tI'_11.-d. pmgertiee of late ,_
4 4. ' . " ' '~
' "' "IL U muufi. '15 .I.I.u unto: u.n.'-uuuu:-u
EU U1. 7
or fourth pinintiffs nor "pinintii'r".
any amount to the oonsitngcfienitttbi; A' defendant
aloe put-up mnstntmioh ;;_.1rhs of rupees
and plaintiffs :11s1td':~tO their vacations
and spend like a customer staying
in a w'*e V the mmringee
x'-..'.!V..- .
.3
fn -in"m
....,
rs
i
I
I
1
E
I
I
I
J
I
.._. " -...' .1 ' " '
t tin t §.I-112'-EI'1':'i'T."I£.""-.}'.U ti-'..k'..1-r' advantage at' the aha:-.-at:-.
!'i'V'!'5Ti.I"'.I.
w_ of the pihintift" an nppiication for gmnt of one acre
A -»Sy.Nt3.59fV5-G_:2 to Tahsfldar is denied. It is avermcl that
been allotted to the defendant on merits
it subject matter of the case and plaintiflis have
I;0t._4_got'"nny right. title or interest in the said land. it is
averted that plaintiflb have ac-quimd their
\..l.!.l.!. I. u
I'
.. .........a ' |._' ..'._ ..-...._.1' 1.:-
1' 'V. _. -f:=:V1I::u {ans
5
E.
'7. I have for the
.-.=.1.'*'-,...,"....*=...'-t--{'.o&:-;r'.d.'£3;*£* sand mo 1-:;:u..-- v--wt ap"-*a.'i:-.3 for
the "mu-po'"'r:x'i=~:;;'1t§~_"§?3'§ 3 anu'"" 4. Roopotxietlts
1 and ooihnvcmd-Zddoofom the trial court have
not choose; "to this court though they won-.
with
ootmoci appearing for the appI.-.iiant-
:"op1§:l1t1iit"i§t1bt§:1_'itted that the mm court has mud. in holding
theit'*~thc--..ple.itififi's 3 and 4 are entitled no 1/aw share in suit
fipmpcrtios. The lmrncd counsel submitted that
on moon! including the cevidenoe of the defendant
l ..
\§Lx/"5
-In
gun.
IQ»
. and his witnesses would ckarly show that item
schedule is. sy.No.s9/5r;:2 is the --
the defendant. The said property has new
favour of the defendant and
I_I_n.,_utliorised1y cultivating tngtsmn and'i.:ti1ie._'~fiathei- er *
tirue p'iainti.*!'s and defen_e1__t was in pcvssessiébn of the
said land. aTu*e""t:9-t- efintmi .§h.r.Le '.111, the said
plainfifls share in item
given up their share in favour
of the money in lieu of their share
"mg-. without looking into the oral and
tuidutzed by the defendant has
._ th- iasttes .5-.wI.I.. -1' t.._. and
thmr;:n.~.., the judgment and decree passed 'by' the tr'.:.=-11 ecu. .
.. is to be set aside and the suit is iiabie ts be
it dismissed.
g-I
I53
'EL the counsel appmlinfi' fhe
piaintifia 3 and 4-respondents 3 and 4 i11., tnée'ea§pp-;¢1
submitted that plainfifib 1 and 2 __Who_ éhmfi-..H” ea,
as CWs.1 and 2 have stated thaf’:4tht-5*
claiming any share. Defendmet ” L’
1 and 2 are schedule
that plninfiflh have g5Vvt::11.Vfup ‘thc:{_irvV.-u;;.u__’§ .11: ea”.1i items I
and 2 of the scl;edI.!_b “+f4.1~ efenciant in
IL-.1
,1’ the ‘_3cw;’–.}£:i’vT§,fi’VV.by4.4Vi’iaeit¢ not been proved.
E?
‘ iofé. that father of the
_. _ was also in posses. sion of
item of ‘ also and the contention of
the _ said pmperty «comprised in
* .’Sy;-56.159/SQ? is ffie”‘eeH’–tmqui1txl property of the defezgdzmt
“11¢J:t”«.l;ieei1A~e._si;:.betanfiated and thezefoze. the trial ca-3″:-t
h.-.=vea__ that t…e pl-.=.:’.’:tLfi’s 3 and 4 entitied to
113′” in a the aiii’- st’.-heciuie properties and
A C the judgment and decme passed by the trial
KSHJ5
j.. 4…… …-.1..- :!__,g n-t Q ,0: interference in__ this
$1′ dc!-:A’z’rn…_,in!=I.fjr_m_ in .,th_1’g appeal an.’-‘:
an 1111…:-I…-. «>1-u. find-inn nf I (‘,.(”.’!,’I_” a that ~_
I ‘ ” n [_l_|_Lr “J5 ‘Li ‘WIC ‘or
pnopcrty was in possession
and defendant has to I51-“JP’-“I1? 1’8
the self-ncquimtl property ‘-
2) Whr_,5tl1e§ .’ thc;=._fi1:(iiiig”‘o:i:” mutt that the
ta ;pTrevp”-“_th~¥jt p}m’:ntifl’s have forfeited
their taV%Aites;% pies;-1}+«n-1gpfitnc schedule property is
of the court that plainflfls
aze’~~:g;tit1cd’ to 113-6 sham each in all the suit
‘ ,,¢5¢am= justified?
VA Q-;u.l.AV’:_ £-…’I_….u.–ud- gaunt’ 1-Igrw—d vunnnprl bl!’
‘ 5!! ucr um .I “am In an-M ‘-=’-=’-*~- 1-‘”””-”-“” J
u-;;.,; c:;9.._.. — in this appeal?
.A and the above points as bllowa:
n1..1’:t_-;g __.w.-. proved that 59,3 AdfVt_he_V;5i.:1iIit sc!1ci1u1c k %
Point No. 1: In the nflinnative. %
Point No.2: In the nifirmative
F’oint No.3: In the _
‘I”I
roint No.4: in the negative f-in’ 4′
11. POINTS No. 1 TO
together since they “to avoid
repetition. The Lnnbit of flies in :1
narrow comp;aséaAt.f1’he otfitg comprises of
three items’!offfianflloittititeuin. tflzuk
‘By No «5o,m9 m-mm-r–v 1 S_-,’.No.59,’79 m. an-1:.’i””g
G.-25 {iris mt.-assuring 1 acme. The
relation ahiong is not in dispute. The plaintiff’s
= the sons of Narayana. That having
‘ Tdefence taken by the defendant it is also clear
. does not dispute that item 1105.1 and 2 of
property belong to the father of the plaintiflis
x V’ .. the defendant and they are pmperties.
i. in, the
sqvvr an -q’-var
3 and 4 have forfeited their right in respect of item’ pl’:
of schedule pmpcny as they were paid K
to which they are entitled. So has pitem-3
g’_1’|I’IlI'{l’I’l’lI nrnmprlir in rvmnnnrnprl it ifhn lY\flifl!1i’.1flfl ‘
‘ill. I V-II-‘|u’ Fl: Elk?’-‘5 I-J II-1′ \’*I.ra.|’I».’I.vJ. &&V’|c’I-E’ \’ ‘.’V.!-Id ‘If. -l\n”«l.l
._.’I_._ I…
rattan’ nus that azm””‘1 fmirpc-1:.*t’y Wsaj:”e., .. 111 –1:cau”.”<arr'p:}';aié%t; (if their
father and in the abgca.'-nee of"ti1ti.: idefeiielant was
cultivating the said Léoiitendod by the.
defendant tpdtpppp dint.-Q gpphdduic property
Vtitfreé._:w;§s"iiot in possession of
his £m2.~.er'ff ..h«:.."; 'dtiiliitrated the said land
has been granted to him and
'fn-iv, "inn;-1_ d'f'!'l'I"If nf an I') hand -nu I-uulgn nnirl
'I'VE
1:-Hair'-.'u: 54.1.1.-I.n. – |\.'.v–I» -I-I-I-I-I I J val: IJ'|–"!o
the '.|"!' fi.ne.._:11.:
?’1’1 pr-.’rsr::ru’1i invtwtnirnt-. {Tu r’t ‘iii 0
it :iE:€§01I!t§’t)f–tii€. joint Both the pm1ies-plaintiff’s :3 and
‘.4: have lead defendant to substantiate their
‘eontention. So far as plaintiffs 1 and 2 mt.-.
H Aperaiicuaiiied. they have been examined as Gwen] 2 by the
U”
court and they have. stated that the.-.y are. not ”
any share in the schedule pmpertics.
12. On behalf of the plajntixfi. pkiintiif *:~1¢5;.3§’.Lii1g:appa.n;A
is examined as PW, 1. He. hasttnitgtntéii-,tIie
in the plaint in his titntcvj in
his evidence that his possession of
-.11 t c: three and land
convnrted intp was in Army and
he in the: year
1989. in item Nos. 1 and 23 being
g1’ante:dLin Kfatrnttrw their: father. item No.3 has not been
” V’ ‘fnvouré 6f’hVny person when the suit was filed.
am doing ooolie work. Their father died in
. Irina aflcr the In :5 .nd. after tll.-1’.
of the piaintifia and sisters am Inarricd.
has furthcx deposed in his evidence that all ofthcm have
~33′
cultivated the land and he has also contnlbuted
development of the land belonging to the ‘
1’11 the suit schedule pmperty wat?t’J($5t1tstt11etecl«
1990 am 1;: has 3139 made t’11e”~.
4.1.- ……’..1 |………–t, ..’.~.,.: ………:.:.._..;.a..’…”. .e.L~… .;;.;…+ .4-
– 1.1 l..l!.’LlflC–v_l.I.l.k.’!.>I. I1.’ wt. ‘I.u~.I,(u_: nu g.u.u.u. 1
land comprised in item’ ‘wrist.
No.4 and the name of
himself. They have
sent notice to suit as per Ex.P1.
He extract. Ex. P3-postal of notice and he has to P29.)-MO
unbwglrurrlwannfhfinggf na1|11r1g__n rd-\-I’ “\l§Il”;’l’|l’I’ will-In-I’tnnr’ F111: l’3II’Il\’I’I!’I’.’ can
‘flu-*:’*-W” -lu’Lu”\-IuE’.’J-I-I.’-u’ 15- W-‘{u’v”-I J -I’-II ll-Wu’-V-I:-II -I-‘-“W-‘\’-IVWu”ul ‘I-I’-‘ W.’-Ill’-“»IIl’ V?”-uhlulpls
. i.’iIl,.EiC=!’_A!2E1i.JI1(e’y.vOIti€I’ in the name of the defendant. it is
eIi¢.ited”i§i~»’.t;i:2e;’:;’¢3ii::ss-examination that when his father died.
fotirth was aged 11 years. He does not kznow as to
whethe-r “his father was sufl’ering from epilepsy and was ‘
\9’
L.
unable: to work. It is further elicited that he ”
upto 7.». standard. He has denied the suggegtidnathfiitll L
fa.t1_1c.1′ Lag diicmaclicd upon the stvif l1czVdéca_
‘Jun-inn-III I-‘n
I-‘.I..I’..’VV
l.l.l.’CI- dale-. U11 un-
favotlr of his father. it is eiiéi:ec;
examination that it is 1::t;~tV t111a:=l”ti>’A.si?s_:tis’gVVgV;i,&.~.a_s.yt Vgmothcr
was not well and she Jciticl 1 and 2
an-. residing 13-14 years.
They have ndt their
share. yer: Ha.-. was mot:-.i.ving
_ __aftcr deduction while he was
1092? He has
i
E
S
E
I
II
5
in
E
V ” Vv ihaf he is st:-.*d”§ “Ir arrrtirlt
his mother and and not towmtls
V suit schedule lands and that since it
V iv –V for his wife and mother go to and collect
H K order from Post Oflim phc. was .-.u.-nding the
V
aiatiuilt in the name.-. of the. defendant. He has dcnicd
\/W’
L.
20
suggestion that his with is not well and ”
sending the. amount to meet the expenses ‘
his wife and mothor. It is mum-sr in; Q Ea-
\=._,_ minatirm thI3.t his with is w-1-r.’.;. -i’–_i ».\Ji!-:§1vi’::,’:’t: ”
uopuumom o 3 a Wfiltlfifiu He
Bank of itiysou.-. at Htmstur. i-Sis” in the
year 1994 and she the time of
It is__ ‘ wife is
working has denied the
suggestion. Army then.-. was :1
a notiot;-. to attend the
panchayathi; Hf: t.ht.=.t the la:-_d_ i.- ::,n.I.r grnntmt
-. _ no’… 1119-1.-In
_A.–.
3.. €_.l’.’__..I .._A.. _….’I is .2 _ -_ l_.’….._..I.I.’ _
I11 IIIIITIJUI ‘-J1 ILIC» ‘E-‘!,’+.’I.l.T-.l.l1.Ii.:I.l..I.I l.’I.l.l.l ll 1 [I C l.l.ll’I.l .lI.I.l.I.l|5C.’-ll 7.
have objections for grant of iom: in
It is further elicited in his eman-
3 _ he had sent a notice stating that land at
” t 1* oto”;m-.m%%No.3:t should be onottod in favour otjploinmro :3 and 4
eatiti -the defendant and not cxcltmivcly in favour of the
…X
vv
defendant. It is further elicited in his cmss ”
the land comprised in item Nos. 1 and 2 yieuaseéo M’
ooflbc and not 5-6 bags of ooflbc asi §i1gcgsi§d..;
4-11′:-vii-pal -I i nwsng-nlrn innfin is.-:1; 1″
‘I.vJ.l’I.-.l.\I.flt.I. J-ll. 11;’: V..«.u-st-ma Va!-l’I.Il.I.lq.|..l.u.nI|¢I.I.ax-was ua.nn.~-u_. as
0.
i3””” if”t’;’t, {ii .
fit
fio.3
He dies not as ‘t.r=:>””1r.}.I*.VI.:t’:’§4!c”liV’4’5.1r.._ti1«:-.ttiefezn-tiiant has
made: an application :0.» in ita.-.m
No.3 on 12.8._9l.;:Viic that since.
the extent «if .59 to himself and
fiby receiving amount of
Rs.5o,(2oo.r- Rs.50.000_I- in mapect of
» I and 2 of the schoduicr property. iic has
__tii§$”i§t1ggestian that himself and fourth plainflfl
‘ Rs.20.000/- from him and executed received
V. naval’ thiitfioompmminc. entered into on 18.3.95 and balance:
\-«N
of Rs.30.0D0/- was paid for which he. 5 not
\_,9.J.
i. ‘i’..z-at i’
e.xeeuti91% the receipt and that plainfifl
received Rs.30,000/- subaecluently. The
E.
_-t in. his — -_
p1.ei_n_t1′!’ Next was 11;
n’,
5 .
,3
in
the pa-.–.e-.5-.;-e.=.-.~.,gs on 12; :5: ia4:€-ufther ee:.~r:a: *=
cross-e.xumuu1′ tion that ‘flout
for granting item No.3 int of the
defendant after the shame in
the family the suggestion
that the la::nti”v- unauthorisedly and be
evicted» the uuctiy ‘unauthorised cultivation
of of
to h….’–. has flee est’.-“.5”-.;.,et*.<.*:*. that pk-u..–t:fi's 1 and 2
tem $503.1 and 2': in favour of the
»glefendunt, is further elicited in his emee-examination
't1tut,it Vvisttviiat to suggest that himself and platntifl' No.4
their right in the family pmperties and they
H have given-up their right in respect of family pmpertiee by
the amount in lieu of the shale. It is further
Hz»./"s
'I'D'
elicited in his cI'0ss~ex£_unination that his
possession of the schedule land about 10- '
death.
13. PW.2 is plnintiif Nce.e4oagao1x{1;-efie hae’v:eou§obo1eited »
the evidence of PW.1 and ” {was also
sending the amount fttzgffotjltixragiouzi schedule lands
.!1
t11_-.t
:… :…1.. : ,.–‘fl.’~’
.l.l.l. m = -i§..”‘l’T””‘ _ M
1!.
I511 shame Exs.r"*.i'n'i and mi --
Ireeipfs of Lufikling material and he was
also the defendant for cultivation of
the Aland ._ thafv’*his iiiiother was receiving Re. l50l- per
V’ . mozogthi-.”oHe”o-has moeipta as per Exe.P.’:\-‘3 to 36. The
item N03 has not been allotted to his
it poeeeeeiox; of plninfifl’ No.3 and the
‘ A -1- ant’ I-11:: Inna: nnrnrniv;-Qt’ 1′-rt {fawn (‘I Q Inna
– I. \.- I 1 \.’v\.- -r. :
Lu.|.\.I. I..t.u.« u.1.I..I.I..I. veuyzsml nu. nu.-.:.u w u
oolivfierted into a paddy innci and now there is a oofiee piant
the said land. It is elicited that he cannot idcnuizy the
\)
\r
signature. in the sale. data cxccttted by plaintiff K
per Ex.Dl3. It is further elicited that he. was
when his father died. He was smdS?5iig”in
e:-.’pih.:p”y r-‘-2*’: hi” -“ether S’t.’¢’;’¥t’-‘i”-Z””»,- ‘§;a.”alysis. ‘3-is …;’;;”.-nltt-.:..-‘1
that his wife is working it fiuthsi”
in his cmss-cxttminatioti No.3 was a
paddy land. Hef1:ia_s tttst land was being
cultivated Mr that since thy.-.y
could it of water they had
left started cultivating the said
Infld nndiiggndg-.. lb! gfllllt of and that it
t”‘i” t” ‘ ‘ “M” ‘*-“‘ No.3 1* ” “mt ‘ is
dei’~t=rudant” in It .1:-r335; I iu;::.u 113… u.u.’u.
» gmnttrd absolutely as owner. it is furthc.-.r’ eeiicitc:-d in
__ ation that it is true that land comprised’ ‘ in
1’t”3t:Jt3’ ‘tvas allotted to the. defendant that they have
appeal before the Assistant Commissioner against
‘ grant. It is furthcr elicited that it is not true to
v’
that tits fatty;-.:’*–g_éas sttfiedng ” ._
suggest that since he getmtezager extent of land
Re.50.000]- as per the compromise V’
-..<-nw.n.= an. '9 '-
t-vemm-I! :1.-zzipt for Ret30,l_)()t_),f-
. L . ‘. . . V .. .’ ~.
1113 1]g.l.!’l’ In .I.’«’.3!!1JUUt U1 IIC-LIV}. nu.-r:.?._ q3i._u.u 4:: G-..u. -..~~..u…’m,»
pmpertiee. He has aieo Vfipfifi’
fmm Rs.2D,000l– he tt;iib9tlntfief’Rs;i§tO,fIX)/ –
in etush from the aerendaist their right
to claim theilj, ef the schedule
properties property with the
cf the étefeadiint.
and he has depeeed. in
his tltat the plninfifie and the defendant.
. V. = the properties in possession of
N.::a’av_ ‘ ‘, of plaintiffis and the defendant. Plmnurrs 3
and have iv:-.ttifi1ed.. Lara-:1 vTw’.1′-E:i”Ji’ifiu’:’a”.”: in items 1 mm’. a -…
theafnchedule property 30 to 40 bags of coffee seen. ’15
tfand paddy was grown by thther of plm’:_ntifl’e and the
\1″
defendant. It is elicited in his cm.-ms-cxmmilaation ”
worldng as teacher in the school situated pytfie gm Ear
pisnri land ofitcm No.3 ofthe ucmgaitte % .,
I._aii.’I.I..n.te§. that pkmvfi 3 9…?-.4. 4 I-“V§’._sL.v,-‘:12.-.1~.ts; -=~’-i~”v ti.-V ‘has. ”
_’I-..£_..I LI..- A.’I.. ‘J. I.
_.. .._.._4.:-._ .2, .”.L~ _: v.__- ‘ .:_|”.
ucumu um an 531.’-nu 11 u.l.l:ll us: 1,
lfifxfmnfig ntuf f3 fi’.’11j
Ifhintifis 3 and 4. It if: elven.
examination that ainoe’ l5_’ the date. of
deposition Qua; cultivating
the schedufid in-his moss-
Fv!§.€{fiv§as- a..lbI;nnn land and plm’ntifl’a
and dc;f¢nd§\nf,?§’v’~fg§;tfl:1:cr_ that land in the paddy
1 mt He 1:1.-.;..z3″.!.2-.–g¢.!.-25¢;-.1.-n pLn.;-r.!i*.’t’-.s 4% 91:4 5
changes ma 3-‘
. farfeiiefi flit)’ fie”: I aiflu at ‘f scheufiiie prrnpefiir:-.1:
in their share in respect of the ache.-.d1fl:=
m”A.=D’|J\Ill)’:i)’| I-nu-an Afilfldfififl 1′ his gnniplnuu-spun; I~ nud-
‘-Vt.’ I1 lIJ!.’VI..’I.l.I.’l.l’.l. HI-“§ KIX’ l I-I-Iv LIE C«V.ll.l!7-.I.-“.71.:
‘. i::.I:_ a resident’ of Kmmr viiiage. and he kn:-.w fiither of
and defendant-Nmtayan. Namyan was his muck-..
\..«.«>
27
Namyan was in possession of the achedtllfi
Sy.No.69-5C measuring 1 acre and was; ”
in posacs_ aion of Nmny_nna–fiithc¢r §)f
-1._.I-..1- _.._. ‘. .1… .__…..¢. :..’..p.._;.’.
maumuum fi1UpI’:”.i”i? ahmit 4:’) ya-Lg.» an — §..ll’.’-I!J_I’!_’3
3 and 4 ” after
retirement and they gmulopment of
the schedule k mm’ ation
that he is is furthc_-.r elicited
that ‘i4§.nd”§Qomp1is¢d in item No.3
into next before the date of his
he hm
4.-1
-1-nmi:-‘m;»; %:–3;4j9s;, h.§§;€3 dc-.1Led. suggc-.;ti.L!n ¢I..:,.n.¢
‘5-I ‘Er ~.r v.r¢.s-aw
¢ -1: |…_…I ________.-.___-u 2.. .u._._…_
I I 111111.! (.’~O!.Il.])l’1BM.7{l ll! lIl’.’»Il.I.
% :j~ae.3 ofvAtE1¢aié”E1Ig:d11h pmpeny. He has admitted that piaintiff
N€_i3Ai”s’ Thithimnthi and plm’ntifi’ No.4 is staying
in i’ca11u%I§%ami
, .16. Defendant is cxammcx.1′ ‘ as E’J”w’.i and he has
ijsitmuted the avermcnts made. in the written statement in
his catamitmtion-in-chief and has stated that
of the schedule pmpcertics were in possessiafh _
and item No.3 of the schedule. is
nnn-nnmhr If H . .
‘J I I ‘ V’ E’? -C’D”f’ E Q ‘ 1.95’ ‘ ‘ V -‘:HI ‘C:-LH-‘
‘”‘-W P. $”””””‘l!*..!”..d .!”£.”‘
V 3″
_ ‘I_..__._’l ._.___’I L
ifité may Inna cl n-xeafi-rtfw-s
land. His father was s1T1’.Ti;-x.Iing~A’i;1’$Vi3z:psy .«-liihcte. yt-4:195»,
his mother
after the the; was not well.
Plaintflf .Nc§.3 No.4 was ngetl
nine. t:g1tatej§£t¢iém~tl.tor his father and after -the
death mg his mother-are looking .aft’er
V he was: in the land of others on contract hatsiq
to plainfiifs 3 and 4 and constructecl a
-.’-9 H e.-rev-rl “41- §£’_…;”.”‘.,t’.’J=
hdltstz the scheadulc. property. Plaintiffs ‘3 -4’
R j-minted they did not make. any <.\on_tn'_bution for the
' .Iht1ni1gc.ment of the. family lands or for the dam-.lopmcnt_ of
Kr"
_ ‘.1
29
the-. same. He has furthcr dcposcxl that
agmcd to mccivc amount of Rs.50.000/- jg:
shame in items 1 and 2 of the
an!” 91′ I’ 131′ IHIIIIH bun ¢h€’;l’I”§’.Il’l’a”|ILlJ§l’I has
II-IBIS Yv’I.rI.Il\I Iv V I.I.\.-I.I.’_’_I\l I-!J.«II-..|ulI.- 1f’J|-PVI-IV-I ‘Fa”‘–‘ .’
meager arnd that fhfififih thejw. tiave
cxecutcd document in :4 hatu?c”not}c.-xcceutexi
any document. He has receiving the
amount tum; and 4 have
mnsmmtcfifioaao ‘ ttas allotted to them
as been allotted land in
ltouac in 20 cents of out
,,……..u .. .,._..=. …….,
of Rc.5Q;!3{,)f.3{.e and ninama _9q pm. ..a..n
oo12″‘i’aE§’t1u”‘(‘-fitiati the’-‘no’_i1sc.afic’r mo” Rs.5t’i.tfl1″”‘5i – 110’ In
»A in item Noo.1 and 2 of the
A 1 and 2 have executed an}: dead as
Ex;:o13’7scning 50 cents of land which would fall to their
Aaham items 1 and 2 in his favour. Wife. of plainfifl No.3
‘ snot wcll. his mother was also not well, the amount was
KR’
sent by plm’ntifi’ No.3 to meet the expenses of
his wife and mother. Item No.3 is a K
Lafi-
–UJ’-I I
In
I- In vuunu-| urn It-r
. ..-an”. for ‘..-_.r.$ of -=*-if an
F
said land got cuitivatea
property is the self-ac:z1:1i1’ed.VAo-.(1And ii gmwn
wife: in item No.3 of .1… {Ind plnintifis 3
and 4 have acquisition of
the said land the said land and
they have. item No.3 of the
the defendant. His fathcr had
. VFW.’ mm
not item of the s.I.cel-.–*…..1-.1-:2 paw–rhr r-mi
plaizzfifio have not right in the iieii i’v’o..’:’s of tho.
»’ moasuring 1 He has produced
by plaintifl’ No.3 for Rs.20.000/-. He has
piodtiooii tho me dead oxccutod by plointiflis 1 and 2 as per
E1;._l.) 13′”ond mocipt executed by plaint1’fi’ No.4 on per Ex.D23
of their sham in the joint family properties. He has
\M
was in possession of
further deposed that he was getting land. of
on vam basis and on contract basis and he woo’ _ V’
-11-; ‘_._nd. be.-.1on.gi.n_g to D2-3′
land has not been menfiooefi.o.ph/in, .1?’ is
elicited in his cmsa-exrimjpatiofi was
pttmhnsed by He paid
Rs.30,0()g’_ ‘has no receipt
was present when
the amount the suggestion that he-.
the ‘.oi”th¢ pllrposc of this case.
5′ € ;3.IV) § Am1a1ah’ has dcpmed in his
– infl 9 that he knows the plmntifls and
:tVI1_c.u their father Narayana. He.-. came. to
we
Ii
V1.1 -.- -.-mun. rl can J -. .. ~ .-
I’
I
4.3 -..4..–1.:;,¢.;1 ..t..m._¢ m 59 .- ‘ ‘hf up 1950
1
.. .1
1 u. ‘2: (‘J-f fliifl
9!
F:
…. I1 ..
.-JJJ. IV Ll
soliéfltlk properties and he ciied about 3?. to 3 years after
‘(teeming to Kanur. Defendant was c-.u1tivatiI’1g the land of
\ fix
V
othc.-.113 on contract basis and item No.3 has
favour of the defendant. He. has further K
of his cxamination–in-chis.éfm’that ._iit..’-In-S N§j.:3 was
nnianrvi Inna-I 4:-n1-I-in-r 1’1′ urns: Fnrns. ‘1’1rl’ ‘ N Iran ”
]_JI.l.lfi¥I.I.-l-I- Jl.!.|.l.’l..l.5 H.-1..I.I.J.u\.-1. .|.L rrsuuv I.-L7-n,-.–.a-1-In.s.a|-L-__w.I.r –Vv g.
_ Q..___”. __ ; ‘L _ -1’
I.
VEII’isD1lB Lands info 1 ‘fie.'”—-i._ w 1_ c’a:,§-?w.»tur ‘E
watcr he. had left it fl ams~*’éi1dtivated
by Poovaiah for one cultivated by
Dcvaiah for f;gne.?.Qygear. cultivation of
land for “9-__a.f started cultivation
of item’ into a. coflhe land and
=2;.n_ve=. suit schedule pmpmy. He has
f-._’.rt….-.-P. cl.-sages.” ‘hat 3}.-amt-.fi’s and 4 been pa.”
» ‘mgrectttcd receipt in that ‘behalf’. It is elicited in
that it is not true to suggest that item
N-aifi the property acquired by the. defendant. It is
‘*fr.11fthc-Vi ficelicited that he does not know as to whether
3 and 4 have also ptuchascd the building
\3~’
33
materials for construction of the house in schedttls”
is spec’.Ific’.’ ally elicited in his further close-exa.Vmm__f” H
in 1959 item No.3 of the scht§i’it.tle”‘Q1i§;Jear’t3tV:_”
1…”: _._.._1 4-:___…_.1:.._’ 1.- I_n _u. |___’_._;;;. __ .1″ a.___-i ._ _” ;1_..
3.111″ 1115.! IHUIEHIUI I-1 ‘ I51′. 1′ 16111.1.’-(.1 H111′-
‘l”‘”hen-. was before
amount was paid to jt €n:_ts agreed that
balance amount of to plnintifl’s
3 and 4 tewtiidst» “~i_11::._:ite_r:1s 1 and 2 of the
1d; the brother-in–1aw of plaintifls
and 11¢ tlie husband of Poovnmma second
V’ sister of plaintiffs and defendant.
his examination-in-chief that after the
‘, nnnnnmflnd I: (I’ll!
.,1.I.I.vln.-J. \.§.’U’; L13 51.1-r’II’.«
degatii 9!. d d deiesdsnt managed the _:_=-_.i_l,v
the marriage of sisters. “i”‘nem was no cuiiivation
1 new 25 cents of land during the life time of Namynna
\j?~d~
and mm was managed by the defendant
has put-up a house in item Nos. 1 and 2 of
by spending amount and
m1rn1irnrl nvnnnrtv !_1,_1_1_g.i_ i_p_ {mm in; “__:_=..I}.
gr.-.1-.te.:’. to the defe.-rntirunt -w-as
has been convened by ~t.i;_¢ and
thereafter to oofiee depoflfid that
plnintiflb 3 their shale in
the family defendant and
they share and defendant
paid ‘.3’iand 4. P1aintifi’ No.3 signed
the receipt t._a1;€.i p.i.«:i.1.itit.’£’ 1;. net stoned. .11…. ..’.:..
ef each shouki be paid to 3 and 4 in
emit»: in the family properties. 1: is elicited in
hie””‘*mue:e-tfiemination that all the three items of the
: pmperties have a common fence. It is further
it: his ewes-examination that pktixitiflb 3 and 4
\o.Q_
\;”‘V
35
when they were in Army, were sending amo11n.$.._t¢..fi:é:Sf”
mother and wife. He has denied suggestion ‘
was not in possession of item No.3 Mfhk.-L
If in Iv-H11-r nl-inifnfl -111 hi: n-nnu
Q
– -I-I-V -ELI} I-I-I”-‘bl ‘-‘I”0″”-0’-rl -I-5-I -I-ll-‘J VJ-I-V–“II? ¥”¥’m””‘V
between 13it.un’iifI°s 3 and 4 was flag?” 11′.’-Cl, ‘mm ” to
19. Dw.4-c.B.M;it:m§ga .Aia::sjv.%’Aj’ca«-,poaed in his
– T.
_…. c-s..1…1-..=” E1.–‘….1.;-, 3: _.’ ‘
3r.=vi.1. mun iii €’5fi.l.].g.flj.t1;., Ki. ll! =_vu.:t
deposed that V:mi1o:Vt i§,gV tl1c piaintiffs and the
defcndafint di.§f§1.s§i_fe _ in of the schmlule
pmpe.rty £21:-:s% in the proceedings book
maintained 11:-. ‘ hub the same as per Ex.P33
” ” ..ci1t1-‘_sVréiéi”itiarkuc! as Ex. mam) and $3.30)) is the:
defendant has paid Rs. 1,000 l- to the:
t e ..in”nB.1.’!II’E’- f the Pmsidcnt of t1I.l’.’-
not mentioned in Ex.1″)3:3(a) extent of hand is also not
xew
mentioned. He has denied the suggestion ”
pmeeedings took place.
20. DW.5-Basavamju was ~’
Gmma Panclmyat, Kanur r;i1_d~.. Vxhals
that he knows .. the and
there was a among’ and the
w.-.-a-..–n.– 1: Vi …n.-.-.» w. -1-: ru”vfi’-‘ow-d|.’, — – -. w. -an-rv -u. van-
(1 . nfl _1_|_ Il7h’ II!’ 5 . finm
‘prfi P€os.?3’_tif-iy the pmfifiy. it
is elicited ‘:’tio11fl;tiiat he does not know
the was no discussion
mgmdixlg the panchnyat proceedings.
It is jfittthellr tliatlilo pmeeedings took place in the
V’ and mine ‘is deposing falsely.
.fl,A2l1.l’l’.ow.l54sanesh was working as soA., in Talulc
has pmduc-4.-d the papers pertcdning to item
V. I\'<.r..3_ the schedule property as per Ex.D35 and got
Ex.o35(a) to (r ). It is elicited in his cross-
\s..3,;
\./”‘.
«I
exalzniaation that defendant had given an ” –
grant of land on 29.6.1990 and plaintiffs 3 d
for gmn_ t of land in favour of the de£¢’:§&!ane.e.§ H, we
HI
flu: an nan-r Rx n.’-lfiflul if in I’\II’.”!’.h’!.Ig’.
encmached by plaainfiiffags 111: deteutidnt and
land in item No.3 was and was
found to be in_ ;m2. is the sale
deed execttgetidd’ “I of _plaint1’fl’
No.3 and ttptheir share 50 cents in the
scheddk by plninfifls 1 and 2 as the
q._-aw.-a.-‘-u-v 1.. 3… _. -our -II-no—-‘
slm-.:e wh.’k}–h_ “in vlrlms-age-22 Exsgfllé -.nd am
th”. ruzcficufili’ 77” to have he-.-‘.’.n exenfiiitai Err” ‘”ic.”uu”””‘*m:.e. iii
VAE:xe.D survey numbers have not been stated and
d”‘i?1éL’dD;%3V’ir§h_x19t’ by defendant No.4 and revenue stamp I
is cancelled and Ex.Dl4 beam .-ngnn’ tune of
.. No.3 and said that Re.20.000]- has been
\:U’
.r
O
fiom the defendant. In the said receipt also. of
the survey number and the land is not mentiooéntl. ‘
22. It is elm’: on appreciation
on record. that though the .:'{hot *
Nomyan-father of the was in
possession of items 5.2 No.3 of the
property. fh-:2 _ho.s’p”o’$ ‘. –ib-‘tcoifi.a€u-d. _ 11 the other
hand. the of the defendant
must{hm_re_A tI§ot.’VV_1end comprised in item No.3 of
Sy.No.tfi9[S!3 was also in possession of
Noxoyaoa-&io..:fother of plnintifib and defendant as DW2
% kA – naammm in 1ii”a’L”‘e:v£amin:ttion-in-chief itself in pom-7 of
item No.3 was a poioari property 4-_-arlier.
‘A -.wae ,.fo:”oetl:=.:-.11 9.2.. N-..-._I,r.,oo. oonverted. it mto _po.d.dy
woo} in possession of item No.3 of pmpefiy
‘ fsinoe 1959 and he had grown mgi in the said land.
or
, (ifif6I%§£’iaIi’i “i””nc further’ of the defendant that tn:
The contention of the defendant that land comprises!’ ”
No.3 of Sy.No.69l5C1 mcasurine 1
7 ion of Narayana has not ‘s:1bs_tat1t..it1_’tsci..
1.1.! I VI
-‘””-.-“m’ *-‘…a.-.’.-.:-. M DWs.1 9.3:! 2 as tl-gs * ‘
on beiisif of the tfist._iafié’i_: BIT”V-iflfi
cultivated by one poov-mil andiittitttittafsndttfit”‘tItspasscd
into the land and staitsii said land
and the land is his own right
has also the cvidc.-«nee. of
PWs.1 witncsscs as mfenfled
to is which is oonobomtccl by
+1-. –‘-‘-vi’-V’-‘~.-2 VA .’;.””-.1.’-V;-:.A’3″-.=;~”t’J” ‘3’ “‘.'”=..’:-.:’.’.-.m M’ **-.*m’ at’ the
VA item No.3 was granted to him and he has
sfizotitityiiof Rs.3.489]- out of his own income has
substantiated though he has stated in his
H cezrtiiisncéé’ ‘that he was cultivating the land of othms on B.
it basis and was lmvixig his own income-.. Hf: has
\_3-..,/’s
nowhere stated in his evidence that the ”
for giant of item No.3 of the schedule pmpeny5e.ej;.iejiexieure ei L
was gait! out of his separate iii”
-1
V’; q.-vs.-w.r.-.-uu 1.14;’: _1.r4uI– Inna».-
d . .._-. area
in favourof the ciefei1dant_ant1.Afhee. favour
of the defendant was of the unit.
011 the other’.Vhai1ci. upemeal of the
material on 2 have left the
village and plaintiffs 3 and
4 the defendant who wee in
tr: 1.4-la-u.ra mu-Io-v.~n I. I- I-U.Iql’lol 5. \ -I.aI ‘J1!-I
ieiiow any independent income of own to pay
of land. The material on record shows
V it . that”*the..’ land was in poeeeeeion of father of plaintifli!
defendant in 1959 itself and thexefoie. it ie clear that
of the trial court that item No.3 is akin property
I-9.
vv
1. hernn _’__I_ 1111-run-rrl t
which was in possession of fiithsr of ”
defendant has railed to pmve that it is his ‘
promrty is justified. So far as theinntis 11._0l’Ii1Jl’i£iIAi:V:I_ii’!°3_ii.
N03,] and 2 £ the: sci’…-.dnL=
defendant tttimits fhaf fhey is
Naraynnn. He also admits’ in the
said pmpcrtics. 1 and 2
cxscttted at their share.-. in
item Nos.1 It is the fuxthcr
(-_-113g-_ of 3 and 4 have also
rorreited.1theirvtd;gt5tVd» .3: their share in respect of
V 4. $5554.’ \. – 1.:-a. $.71.-Lu. ‘J I..u..r ‘Aug ‘.555 -u.–..–u.I. 5-J
Hint-n3 ‘I 983 t\1’fI’I’\ll1″fIf nu flu-Ir nmwnfl In
x jzigtaving to the meager extent of land
1 as their share. The said contention is not
‘V V’ .V at sttlistttiitiatsd. It is also clear from the perusal of the
salt.-. deed produced by the defendant as per
‘£r.it’;tt»i3 dated 28.4.1976 that said sale deed is not exeettted
\nL
\,M.2=
PR
exclusively in favour of the defendant and that
executed by plaintiff’s I and 2 in favour of
second son of Natayan and not of
t .
defendant. ‘.”.Le tune.-1 snug’! has I–I3!-l.1.lJ,I’ mm. a
__-1-….. 2 __ 4′:41;~~;n 4.- +”—”~– “’19 ‘L’
Efiti 4 arid fiéféunan 13 cf: to
schedule properties as” :4 2 ‘ettamhted
before the court as CWs}l stated that
they are not__ share in the
schedule thewfinding of the mat
court that .3 am entitled to
113v-I inf is justiflcd. In any View
an
the.-.-
j!
v M’.
filter, lpLht_’l*..fs 1 and 2 h:w- -.v-Mr–n
is .»T’::’\HS;’ and have stated that they are not
any share of the schedule properties and
confer any title in favour of the defendant
in the sham of plaintiff’s 1 and 2 exclusively in
their share in items I and 2 of the seheclule
l It is clear that the said document is not helpful to
l L
WV’!
43
the defendant to contend in the present ease. ”
case of the defendant that plaintiffs 3 mt 4 HI”l£3tt’1i:11§:VA_1′!:E.xgnEE4.i’>l(J 1: 111
items 1 and 2 of the Rtt.5fig0f3(j]- each
and not att.2o.ooo/- t\a1’1t:l.t_”0t’t:l~t’=rt:t’:.ft)1r__-its production of
Exs.D 14 an 2:} the defendant
gji’ “I1″‘~
to contend gfhttf 4 tttttu,-. tottt-mt their right in
IE8-p£’A’.’-‘.l’=’~Dfv 2 of the achcdtlle.
pmpefty as it that any relinqttishment of
thetjc _its’«.n-9 ‘~–sft1ch document in the. present case and
‘t1Att§’;1’_t.’.’fA'()VVI.Et.tV”_”_v»it clear that am defendant lttttt rttflttt to
sut$t:»*ttz1t::t’1′.ct’t’t*;}’: the. contention that plainfifls 3 and 4 have
f’O?£f_’t’.itc!ti”i” ‘their. right in mapcct of itttntts 1 and :2 of the
t property and acootthngly. the lands mmprmt-d’ in
wt’
45
items 1 and 2 of the schedule property have to
joint family properties in which plainfifis 3
dcfegdant have got. thceir ‘. ‘ vVr:sn T
nnnonnncgini-inc’ :1′. ‘HQ th’§l’\IIQ_ Q3″ vunfgviigl , ‘ 2-u ‘ ‘
C’!’kFlG\.’.H-‘1.’-I-W-‘ul-I ‘J1. I-I-1’-‘ C-‘IJHPVW-P C’.-1-I’-I Jr’~’L”‘o”-lL¢~!- -I-Wuv’-“-7.3′-l~ 4|’-If-‘TS SW1!”
mlived at the oonciusion fi1’£’€’;!:VV..62iE:i’I:I1V.¢.ii’l1.1_Vf to
stlbstantintc that plain%ii!i§ 3 mt.-.ir right
in Inspect of their shanéf «;_>_._f the scho.-.du’lc
pmperty whigen prgapemes and mm
plaintifis have” cf the said property is
also flderamziant has failed to prove
that p1V;mn::rgk3 ‘;s;n;¢:::§ t11ci_’r right i_11 of
-‘ I -I-I-an 2 0 Ar {’31: an}:-A1115 -r\-can-tn-Ill-Ir ‘l’I-In
I315′-uL’ ‘an! L,’-L’-I-‘I53 . L1-L5-®.ls ‘-9’ ‘.13 ‘I-II.’ 3\.’.I..I’–‘-I’.I£\.I IL!!!’-‘I ‘Jr I ll’.-
, ‘_ to file. matcrini
__thc finding arrived at by the trial court
be sufl’cring from error appamnt on the
V –V so as to cal1’for-intertbrence in this appeal.
{answer the points for detctmitmtiaon and pom
” ftillowing older:
The appeal is dismissed with costs. The ”
decree passed by the Court of Judge K
in 0.S.No.80_l96 is confirmed.