High Court Karnataka High Court

K S Mallappa Gowda vs Vasudeva K S on 16 January, 2009

Karnataka High Court
K S Mallappa Gowda vs Vasudeva K S on 16 January, 2009
Author: Arali Nagaraj

—~ ~ ~ ww §’i§£5rH COURT Of KARNATAKA 1′-ESGH CQURT 0% KARNKFAKA H39?! QQUQT Q?

mmamm Him,

u v y_wVw.-wwcnw wt’ mflflififllfififl

.1′..”57 :.:'” ,

-mt-/&__ . _

‘mm HIGH comm’ SF Kgmafaxag BfigHGAL€.f}E–2E_g %

DATED ms cm ms 36 TH my 0? Jaxzua, X3. A T ,

BEFGRB1

THE Hc>N’BLE m.msmc::3 ‘

RSA Na 311s§*’*’i?{§:% V
9 EN _ %

KssaALLAP1vAc¢a:~1I;nA;”
310 mm
AGE!) A3011’? s,:$’%.r1-znias, =

2:0 ‘
PEEHY£:,TUh§§{fR

aaxmamna .53 . j

KSRAVX ~
8,10 3UBB.AEB¥A’

AGE1}§AB{JU’I” 4:2
” ‘~ aria} ov.’.$RI.13:.m.R Exmfmmm
1′.’ ” “_£.mr:cm1::

E. 3.

am GOWDA
% AGED Amy? .35 ‘mass,
121.0 EaL1:uLz, xmrqmk mm
% vA3F~R?G*ERI TQ,
* _ camczmmamma 131$?

fj..s11i3z1a.mRAKs
=_s;c;:sr.%Hm Qowm

M * » «~ AGEI) mom 5 2 mmmmgaa

ISIS Lmfififl LEATHER Eififlfiffi
OGR RQAD
CHKCKABEAQQLUR D15′?

…W ,..¢.,m…. W mamanm mm” mm: or mmmmm Mum mum W mmmwm Hm-t mam W m%m&?A@m§WWW

H§€;”§§~1′

.. uuav-nun:-wa. It

5 Kfiki

w; :3 313mm Gowm
mm mom 57 mass, A
R,-0 mmu rwmwa xwr
samcmm TQ
cnxcmmmma am”

[By an: RC 1* aummmra

£133.’):

….u.<n-man"…


2 VA3UnEvA'§:s.;_  » _  «_  *
we     %
AGE!) mow:     
RIG mums: .      %

THEKKUfE~’:PG1$’I”,8; :&E£I**z’;r’>g’
cnrcmmaawa z:;;rs*1* _

xsaamxmma ~ V
we IwEI£%VAb18KPH’x*- AA ””’
mm A1~3OU*I’*53
RIO
3£:_.;r.IAvALLI TQ
8H§l1f{)£’£r& DE’f’__ ‘ *

Kaaéaxirrms

, O MAJGR
.% aw HELFi’ifi–‘€U’RiWAL11

‘ — ._ A ELE’~C°I€’P.I{§AL5
“‘3.=im<::Iw; ms?

vgmrrxifa ”

37; av mmaswmw swarm

mama, R] :3 AHd£AHE’1′.A swam

GPP: VGHQLIGARA EALYAIIA MAMA?
VIJAYAPIJRA EXTEREIQN
cfilcmmmmx

‘._….c*~v—v–~

‘ “”‘”””” * ‘*W”fA’9~§fMna WW m-mN4mA%K.A MNEH €0URT OF KARNATAKAQ HEGH CQURT Q? KARNATAKA H36?! %UW OF mwmzam i~E5€3E-J

5 K 3 A1,j ”
delivered

The 1″4″‘4a:Sa'<-.y1_V_' 5 wm am mapecuvelv' _
Ha's.«.:3; ma 9 mgs. No.58/199"? an the rag cf the
cm C m [ mm
to fiar ahart) have cmmnm the judmmt

daj;ad "'(i32[(}1f20G4 mm in R.A.K-a..2"?}'Q*fl{J1 by
t % T Judge Cmc m, { refearmd in as
Court" gar shmrtj.

2. Respanxim Em} hmesnh mi?’ K.S,’¢’asudem filed the
ma suit against am apwflant and csther” xmpendmta swking
,…K’-\..–…_…»–«-

WM Vmgavwnz NI!” mnnmnznnfl. wmm WEMJEET or mmmmm mm mum” as mmmmn Hm: mum W MnMA?A:%&:Wm’W

Hifik

m u–mu-mum WK

4

par1mo’ ‘ nand a%te powseasicn of Iififh share in ”
of the joint family mmpnzasng gr mmlr, his

bmthers am aisters. The Imrmfi rm:
jud@t and decree riatefi 94; 97125:}:

pxabauimvzmg him Iisom aha:-e 311:}:
mm in the share ofhis aemsad £g§hagf the said
1:’ gagmnz and dccraa um ifizad®.a..Ha.27}20o1. The:
Appellate Court, by and aeme
dated 01101 and hem that the
properties. is decrar: that is challexgecl by
the defendant 2-:aa.1 in 4

_ V
ya) hareixu, fmtfiea am refcrmd as per

. I in the “cm: cam; and film aakmm rm. 1
the sons, the ésfendant Heat 5 to 3 am the
and t mm is the wifie, of mm.

Subbarm Gowda am they Wficffi ail members of thc
joint All film yrupertiwe uaexfilnafl at itam Has. 1
to8iz1t}1eSc}*1eci111ca%e.dt»sthsp1a*mta;’¢jai:1t

c

e mm *””§;«;I$y.’o¢:’la.:!&’\|t ur mnxwmanzsn a-mm»: COURT 0? KA%NA’§M(fi Hifii COURTOF §(ARM&TAK.& WGH CQEEQT Q? KARNIETAKA HEGH

family properfias. Late, Subharnza Gaawda dia::=d. “i:Tr1te
sum on 2913911996 lnmvhttg beam

defendant ms, his gem um plamtifi’ and &

Has. 1 m 4 and E5 daugmers
the ma czaugmm wm
death afthe ma Subbarma % AA % k %
1;) Am the amisc a: Late the
&dant Has. 1 ts plahnm
refiwi to s%*w*% Mat ramny
pmpertiea schedule mad in
the p}éjnt._ ._tiw§c.t durim rm Ifib tima cuf
am’: Gowda, this pmmfi had
in .311 the jnint family pmparfies
of Rs.%,5GOi- from the fatlm- and
eifiect a mgmmaa mmaquishea deed
V L % gm 1999. Thmrm am plafiififiwaa mum-ama
” 14 above suit.

. ‘ &fiyd Km. 1 1:9 4 appeared in the said 521:9»: and

-u. uv<»n'1

%%%.~:£e;rmdant Nos. 5 to 9 rmixxed Ex-mrte. Dafandam 119.2 mad

hiawrittmzaiaafiemxtazldfiméafienfiantfiosg 1 tr: 4 fiamemn
datcd 1'?71Gf1§38'7 adaptim tha wrintm statcmsmt and tha 25¢

c"–f-\*."'\..4

_ ……,. .,,.5w.., W m……mmm mm Wm:-r W mmmmm mm cmm or mmmnm Hm: mum' W mammmi H355:

5

dependent. mm admitting ths reiatianship of ma the
death of their fathm’ an gage-9; 1995 and alas

that suit pmpertiw have been the pm: ”

anecutizlg uh: rm’ tared mm’ q:1.i3’m:c:a- £V”d._é«s.d’Vdza:_i:eci:

relinquished his right in an the [ snag mung’ a

sum of 53,25,500 mm mm&;g;3:n the plaintifi’
i not exztiflad ‘at: any sltngxrxe ‘ .

5. on of PW}. pzamuta’ and
the documsxits 3?,-‘,y:iuaad by’ me pzamaar, thc Trial
Court held that the pxaium’ is
share «sf Mk fiatium namely Late.
fix itam 395,5 ma :3 at the schadub

claim af the pxasmmgor xgsaz share in all

Thwart plaiatifi’ am as» ma. Re.

A L % Cczurt allcxwaé the said apmi, set 3,556.3

F amt deem af me Triai Com am held flaat the

therein is smfifled 13:: am»: share Em all the
psnpartiaea.

‘3?

5. While aelmittsm this appeal «:11 osycnsyzmag Court
has fiarnnflateé tw following substantiai quwtionsgfif

Apmam cm: is A
we mega: as ‘x has
mama jbr ¢;,ri;2gs~:m_, befinra
dea’ding the V appegij H jvj?3H€I£€
am-t did rm mnwks
wk-we Msmm am

(2) flea-as afrhe {ism-as
an view afthe jam
that ms been aifoiied to the

the appeaam met the
appelltmt
am rim ms mathar af rm

%% the raswndsrzm’ main?

V ‘A méf taking ma amsnt Er .-+-_::.r-‘.;-».- ‘-m-:1″: {he

% § % dead mm by me
wndmt fiweih mhizg gaming the

wrnn2r’mu”I . g:vs2’%1A’AI»,px4;§*_:!.JI\i ur M-WNAIAIQA HNEH COUR3″ QF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNA?Ai(fl. WQH COLER? 0% KARNATAKA E-HGH

(4)W7zefiher§he.F’bstAppe11mtCourtisjustzjfied§a:
mtmimigflwkwfplmmmamfifir
pwfition <81 pw'm$ We bet}; pimhfs arid

nz.—{"~""\..aJ

mm. 'l"Iml"'¥iil\l"'Q 35

S

ammm ma twang mt allottém mm :9
fiw f hwm' 2 V

Prasad, the learned counsel for v

also 31-1. Eslmara Bhatt,, the 33: gm am:
rwpandamt.-pIa%ntifl'. The 2m%.%%f:2 __to 5 whca are

– mpacziuely 395.133′-~-%..§:j~3′ Court have

Wm W”… W nnmwmanfi mm Wm;-r or mxmmm may-4 mum W mmmam mm mam W mmmmm mm»;

%med’ absent 2 Pmm
the ::rig’na1 1’ecargVi§___ and also
R.A.Ncr.2?'[:2()Gl. A ‘

$3. Kgff mama, the warned
ecuunsel sftrofiggmntgndad that as it mulci
he there was delay sf’ 43 days
App-ml mam tha Appellatc

,;f mam;-e be had filed in the said
Ha. mg 5 mi’ Léxnimaian Am: weléng wmiernation
9 but the Appeflafie €351.31′: pmafi the

mP”8*Bd’ am am without mmidm-mg the

am and wiihaut pasfiixzg any mafia: ea firm aaifi apgfiicatian

a:2:ithasc%rat}1ei:11pu§’1edjud%tan;:iéua¢:raepassedby
C___g~.–\.\…

.m..n » yyunl wr nnxmnznitn W368 COURT OF KARNATAXA HIGH COURT OF KAHQATAKA HEW4 COW? OF KARNMAKA MGM

9

me Appeflatc Conn eiesmws is be set as£c1-e an thia

only. On paerusal afthe records in R.A.Ns.2?[2CX31V.éfi§’:%l§:’;’$’a’w£véfl u
that this submhsian (if the Icarnmzi mutzaczl far K
larwain is wrzmt. The Appekte «_ 2
aamiama the aaia appuaazim am –
seeking candzmatian of delay ‘V V

and than it should have afa€h¢’&jI5:1aeal on

1’z:arim. ‘Therefore the subsm.ai” ‘ to

the oondonation of daigy Emxuax
Appeal requirw tar: fa favnur
ofthedei’er1dant–appe1la¢171_’ . ‘mi .am:3z-dmg1y’ .

Mamaranaup: [ati I’Za.IIi 2994» exam :4; 96; 20-04
V’ see%’ pm’m1as’ inn tn pzwodune

the am dama 23:63; 19% and
k of m same mad as aadisml
% the ma: mpandmx»-pLa:m1§ has mt filed

tn thia applicafion, Sri. Eshwara Bshatt,
thc mums} far tins firs’: rmpendant-plafi’ ‘
ve1%m1t1y cant:-.::1&a& that the fl $ mde in the

afidavit swam to 211 support sf {$5 said apglimtisen. dc not

“h$

…,.. ..n….m,…m Awgpmglmnu W Mmnmm mm czuuxr or mxmmm mm: cmmf W §€ARNm’m(A mm-5 mum M mammm HIGH

Efi

malaa out any of the: iwwsenm af Clause {b} of Ram Q%’?_¢r

Grdm 41 and thez&r-2 tha mid aypiicatian _

rejwned,

10. In trim of my abmm

quastiam of law as ‘an dfspaaal af by the
Appellate Court an marits applicafion
fiar mxzdonawn cf appeal, in
th¢ ammsmd
error in dea-ewes ta be
r-.-:a1itt::cl back m me sacand. third and
fizuurth auba%.i_4 in thh appaal Ewmt

ft

%%%%%

Ehat, Ewrxnfi mange}. for 1*

T aamngxy submma that I..A.He.2 sf am»;

in this appmz hm to be diapnsefi of by
j, am thezrcfare it mm: Ex smut tn the
Cszurt fir fin dhprzzml. ‘I”h’m aubmiminn canrwt be

< d for the reamu that in view' af my on

aubatanfial qxxwtisan 1'§O.1 that ths Judgwt and I}wre:e

passed by the apwllant in tlm wzlar a.ppea1,is without
¢……._.r~»~…._,.w…

EV?' . auaezwa"":s..,,\.( 5,,A'!(l ur av-\:«NA1.m(A HIGH COURT OF KAWIATPKA l~§!G§-'I CCXJRT 3%' K%EATAKfi HGH COUR'5'@§" §(AW'&A'EM(A %'E@vH

§§

jlxrtsdictioxx and thexefera me mariner has ta be

back to the Trial Court, 2 am mt d?Bp0a1'r1g of
mm and timrefere, the p:1'&6.'t1t I.A.H¢.£' cf _
maxmot be aomadared by man cnbp:mrita s…A»:'B;:1t

canaidered by the appexjm Cnurt
pIaintifi' waulsd be at liberty jug appmm
the said application fir fijjng his
writtm ab]-ectaom ms aral

12. the Emmi apgi is
judgment and ciecrae dated
o1;e:;:2m4% ma. mzvgzcm by tlm Appcallata

_ a (ii:-acting to pass nmassazy ardm on

_ R.A.H£r.2′?/2031 gr the appellarrt mm
Z af ciclay mi’ 48 fiays muaeé in fifing this
and than dgspm of the ma. apm 011 mm.

tlzv.-. Appcllate com ham 2:; cliapwa af tag aaié Rmuar

Appealonrmimafherpaming nmmmry ardersmitimaaid
applicattim for wndenatinn ef ciciay. Furthm; LA. 3&2)’ 2m-4

e%

nu.-u-…. ma-onvwuzus warns

…n……W.n WW3. W nnnmmwukfl rman wum- W mmmmm mm mum ow mmmmm mm mum W mmmmm HSQH

$2′;

filed under Order 41 Ruk: 27 cm by am appellanias

aemnd :1?! on dated 14/ £36,’ 23304 seeE$@ _
produce additional evfiame, be eonsidgxfazl ” w
by the Appellatae Court imelf. The

be given an apportunity to file

said application if they so dgsixe. of the
yw: 1997′, tbs App-eflatae ‘s.*.«f_t}1e appeal as:
mpeditintxsly as posaihfi: pezfiamcy cf
siznihr aid. 13¢ rneturmci
tn the 1.3111 mm» filed ‘m
thb by the of t1’fis-jud%xI. Bath

the parties the Appeflm Sam on

rwtice,

m,am. mmaww,