IN THE HIGH COURT 01%' KARNATAKA AT fiAN_C';)XL€l'RfE__j:.
DATED was THE 231'?! DAY OF JULY; %
BEFORE %' %
THE I~i€)Nv;3LE MR. wsrrcg _.{asm:':--:<_ 'B. Hrrici-§;.r§:§R1 A
WRIT PETITION N0.279€""{§:}3"20O9 VfGM?CVPC} ';
M Wm PETITION
BETWEEN
1
" _ D.1<.'*mmR--1g:T
MRS.USHADB;ALIGA,~~ 1 ..
W10 LATE B... L3E\iAD£&S I:?aALI(13%A"' .. _
AGED 52 YEAR5$§?%4wL%V _
SCHOOL
BANTWAL 'rALu§«; J
I).K. IZIESTRILTI'
B, VAMAH EALIC-A. s
5/0 1, T?) B, DEYA--_Dx'.\S"BALIGA
AGED 20'¥_I:2ARS % ' %
R/AT scaom Rem %
3A%eiTwA-:, TALIEEK.
B; f:~i4*avE§';:~é% 4'B;:H:.L§-GA
* am %LA'r§;43. me;vAnAs BALIGA
AGE?) 2o.v:E;aRs
R/H!' SCHOQL ROAB
BANTWAL TALUK
9.3:. mmfaicr
% ' .;»;.aSi'ER 3. ARJUN BALIGA
$10 LATE B. DEVABAS BALIGA
AGED 13 YEARS
" "MINOR, REP. BY HIS MOTHER 8!. NATURAL
* GUARDIAN SW. 13. ursm D. BALIGA
R/AT SCHOGL ROAB
AND
BANTWAL TALUK
D.K. DISTRICT
(BY SR1 RAVINDRANATH KAJ\.m'H§ A:1fQC5*rE)' 7
MR. B. SURESH BALIGA
S/0 LATE I-3. DAMODAR BALIc;A.,,_
HINDU, ABULT --
BANTWAL
9.1:. DISTRICT %
MR.RAGHURAMBALg1GA %
s/0 LATE B;"i)A;!v£ODfi;R BALiC_}A._ "
HINDU, "
406, SWARNA; {REEF A ARTMENTS
BE.JAI,,__ MANGALQRE 5'25
MR. 3. SR';'1\!AVIV'§'i'-*..Sv-lE'V3fi.I,.'I'("?a'~.4:°uL'«. ' '
s/0 Lyra B. DAMGDAR BALIGA
HINI)U,A_DUL'I' _
521 1, BAN-¥'R? nu: vu_B:.,90M FIELD
MI 43322, USA_' *
. _ M'1i'--.."A:;8 iV;&If€1JNT$VéE§AI;}GA
% 5,10 LATE 13. 'DAMODAR BALIGA
HIN'D.U',=AI3I}L'r".
X C3333 JEWE;LLERS, MAIN ROAD
BANTWAL; -:";.3'<. xyrsmrcrr
ma. ;i£u§ARDHAN BALIGA
3/Jo LATE B, DAMOIZXAR BALIGA
» HWDU, ADULT
'EALIAGA COMPGUND
1 ..<;:.V,s SCHOOL LANE
' BANTWAL
" Mums. B. VIDYA SHENOY
D/O LATE B. DAMODAR BALIGA
W/C' MR. F'. DINESH SHENOY,
; '.1.' " 2
HINQU, ADULT
MATADAKARI ROAD, 259 CROSS
NEAR DUKES MANGR
MANGALORE -- 575 006 I
7' mes. VEENA SHENQY _
mo LATE B. DAMODAR games
we MR. P. DINESH SHENOY2, "
HINDU, ADULT _ _V
REGALJA. mgr No. 301. 4% - % "
noon Ne.4 85 5, BEHIN£§"RAM(.'g_O S'£'S'I'EM_
SARDAR PATEL ROAD .. *
ADYAR, CHENNAI ~ 509029'.
3 MRS.SUDHA"KU§VA .:
D/0 LATE 32;. '*DAiédV§).DAR .E3"AL¥GA'a_' %
w/o MR. savnsazom »KU{}VA"M
HINDU,__4§DU!;I" ~«:.,___ _
W/O MR. [SGRENDRA KUDVA M
SHAMBHAW r4IL;:¥A, SMITH LANE
MULKYK-A 5?-4'1:s4=.
9 MRS. CHI'I'RA PA}
D] 0. LATE B BAMODAR BALIGA
W/»C£.MR; GIRIDHARPAI,
1* - I:iI£si'£)U;7AD'U yr
~_ »SU-DHINDRA OFF SET PRESS,
4%.a'i?¥.c:m:::<3s; BjArmazAL, D.K. DISTRICT
MRS; B. V=I{Afi}'}5;iNA BALIGA
L w/cs MB; EJSURESH BALIGA
HINDU, A:lE)UL'I"'
" " 'T _ B.AN_'I'\Vfi'L, I).K. DISTRICI' RESPONDENTS
‘ -_’I’HEs CIVIL JUDGE [SRDN] BANTWAL, ELK DIST’. PRODUCED AT
‘ = .._ Ai’«l.M4E.
TH¥S WRIT PETYFION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, CQURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
Q.13..D_.E_R_
The petitioners have chaflemgoé €i*1:: 1
dt.29.08.2007 on I.A.Nos..}’V o
file of the Court of the Civil Juagg (Sr. 1311.); mg
2. The Trial on merits as
well as on LA was not
aooompar1io_d___ oy Lfinemorandum of facts.
Under R111}:-A Civil Rules of Pra«::i:ioe,
196? every by a supporting
ojfidavit, facts. As the same has not been
oono case, I.A.IV was liable to be rejected in
nmimxgo need for the Trial Court to go into the
merits fhoovéfiizficafion filed. Under these circumstances,
.1′ of I.A.IV by the ‘I’I’ia1 Court is upheld only for
of noI’1~mainta:inabi1ity. Liberty is reserved to the
V. ‘ to make one more application but the same has to
accompanied by a supporting affidavit or memorandum of
facts, as the case may be. It is for the _
£116 anticipated 1.23., if filed, in i3.CCOIr.(;};Iél:(:3’C’ ‘
afibrdizlg opparturxities 1:0 both Lhc
3. I.A.VI is filed under Code of
Civi} Procedmc for sf said LA is aiscz
dismissed by the to flylfi
facts of the cage uf the writ
petition I.A.VI.
4. Tfie. fiuit against: the respondants
for Da1¢ifi,°’3» awr§:£:i:1§iI1ts,’.’~eAfi:.»’ V”‘i’:IVr1e respondants filed the written
have gm: the properties based
011′ dt.20.05.1996 executed by Late
Baliga. Based on the rival pleadings, the
.(30urt”f1*;;éLI11ed the following issues:
*{_:)”‘ Whether the Pzainrzfis are entitled for the nefief of
partitizrm and separate possession in suit schedule
properties.
(2) 1)’ so what extent’
(3) Whether the Plainhfls prove that the Will
1974 has come up in the suspicious
and as sad’: it is not bindizzghugagn
order or decree. (20-54 .996)’
5. The petitioner-pIaintifi’s’ filed ”
framing of following additional
* Whether the W préaég; ..»1j{h¢:!.’tV the win of
Damodhar Varngm Baligqviéxemtégi éfi.2i1{}5.I996 is as
valid Wifl.” ; .
6. The EIA retaining the issue
ms in its
‘2’. Sri Ra§’i11dra§1’%§.th:.”‘ the Ieamed COURSE}
appea1′;ing’fer. submits that late B. Damodhar
éxeguted the win on 07.03.1974, which was
He contands that the testator gave
rights 33:)’ his children. He also: bmught to my notice
‘ 2_of. thk: written statement filed an behalf of the first
No.1 herein}, Wh1’c:h made; as foliawsr
A x V’ ” ‘*2. 3723 several properties mentioned in the sdzedule
” ” fl to H of the plaint are either nan-existent or are assets
£33;
which are 2102 partiafle as herein am ‘ ”
knowledge of the pIaintt_°fj’,’ they fmyg no r’ig}iI’in»”‘i}ieii}.oj’5V ” ”
the last W27’? & teslarnent daféd T.
executed by & aitesied at the late 2 ”
Bllamodar Vaman Baliga. ‘is
The attadc on the said will malgrfng out mg as
azzeged in the paras {i}..§1I2d;fi)”Qf.’£f:g”‘pI;1irLt ibiaily
false & the sauna known’; to the 13′
pzmnnfif’ = . ~
8. The that net efiect
cf the dismi$§al”{;f’ validity tn the
Will, dt,2{§’;§)5._19’9€i”..f.._»He,_”s1§bmitS that the Tn’a1 Court has
erred in lo01sfitiancrs thff written statement filed can behalf of the
In para (1) of the p1a1’11t, it is stated that the
‘ 1996 is not a genuine Wfll. The sum and
substance of the petitionecrs’ averments in para 6} of the
plaint’ is that the tcstator ‘gas 1101; in good physical and
fii
mental condition to write the Will. They have
“The challenged W111 is shrouded ‘ they ‘
circumstances”. The petitioners
at all. It is not in dispute 1-99$ is
reghtezred Will. Obviously it u{a€:’t::.»:~:_¢=:;£:1_»_;tec.i’ ‘E5éf;QF€:f§th€ Sub-
Re@’stra;r, Bantwai. the Trial
Court has held is the dust and
cloud can the Wm full of cloud and
dust. The cloud or suspicious
chcmnsmfices, sétme. If the other party has
to prove suspicious circumstances, it
§t3:;Qun§s« to preve the negative. I find the
Court to be sound. Not fincIiI1g any
merH;s– mtitions are dismissed but subject
‘7f_tc the made and the liberty manted in para 2 0f
order as to costs.
> bvr
Sd/-§_
Judge