IN '§'I~fl£ mm COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE' .. T .
DATED THIS TEE 137'" SAY GF APRIL, 2999 __ ' '
BEFORE
THE, HGMBLE am. }UST1CE = _ T i'
R.S.A. No. 75:;.:20e7"-.A
BETVXEEN :
_---- ---..u.p»q._-.------
I Sri.SGSA'I'XSH _ 1
sro BASAPPA PATEL s G
AGED 43 YRS _ '
2 Sri.
s/0 LT s G'B.r&SAPP;i§.PATfEL'~~.V A
AGED62Y1§S--::__ .'_ * 4 é
3 S1i.SVVV:('§?Vé§'2IE':;;P;I.V % ~
sxs L31" 3 I3.AS;>\F?:§; PA"I'.EL--- %
AGEDPMYRS
ALL ;é;a<;9g1c1;:;TU:<:S*rs
Bf SURGUR 'VL'£,LA&E,
~ _ sv:£:1d1;*v1§3C~..:a.%TQ 57': '
« ss:~:im::2<f;A_;D':::;VT. APPELLANTS
(33.9 Sri. M ;é;?€§I;x?;~::§.;}x, "Ann. FOR
" V V PROF s"sREEK¢im.1H ASSOCIATES, Anvs.)
Am:
% ' sz~;."::€<3 ESQWARAPPA
A % ssc: s BASAPPA PATEL
;:a~r:i~;»m 7ABQU'I' sa YRS
gagklcummmsr
[ =R£.I3 SUGUR. VBLALGE
sgmaaa TQ 5; mm: RES'Pf§)NDENI'
{E}: Sri. K T MQHAMN33 Afl"e.s".}
0% \i'\_
!'\2
THIS RSA IS FRED UNDER SECTION 100 OF
AGAINST THE JUI3GEMIT.N'I' & DECREE DTD 5.10.2005
R.A..NO 49,/2£){}2 ON THE FILE OF THE PRLCIVIL
{SR.}Z}N.) 82; CJM,SHIMOGA, ALL(}WING THE AI'F'EAL _;.
AGAENST Tffl JUDGEES/fiN'l' AND DEGREE DT§):20§2.,2G{l2 . *
PASSED IN US NO.293!§997 ON Tfifi Ffifixi OF
EUDGE (JR.§N.)SI~E\«iOGA.
Tms APPEAL COMING ON FOR 15-+I)l\;;';'3_'A:~si*'ll{VO1§.1'~.T'Al"II.:lS'
THE CGURT DELIVERED THE FOLL§)W'ING; .. A
JUDGME§i. 3 _ _
This geccmd agapeal is diregted ag;iin:l;.f'Vl_:Eh<l§l";!'13fig1ncl'f:t'a§1d"l§ecz'ee
dated 20.92.2092 £31 0.3. No. ééslggai -lfrincipal Civil
Judge (Junior Division)' at 'Principal Civil
Judge ( Senior vide judgment
éatcd 95.13.3395; - J. .1 ft; _ V
2. Appelluaagsll atellfixclllééihzléigxxts and respondent is the plaintifi"
before thaze. _§;fll”14i:;:.i.C(;1;1’t.l’}E’3z:._.t:11Vis judgntznt, for convenience, {he pariias are
I ‘1’€;fe§feé.§<l Llaavlt 'lyefere the Trial Court.
3.-jflaizltifl’ ;§afi.a’§li::fen€iants are broflxers and they are the children of
-‘ Eatle’-?8asappa”P§&ii. It is the case ef plaixitiff that p1ainti.fi’ and defendants
cafisliizzts Black: family and the schedule preperties are the jeint
. -f:éV:i§i§y*lT?pr9perties. In the year 1991 there came to be a temporary
V l’ ._glz4f;*az1ge1mnt amang the: members 61: the family ta reside separately mad to
sszzltisgate the Séihfidfilfi prapcriiag separately. Bu: flaem is :10 divisism ef the
gain: fatally grepsertias §§«’ mews and bozmdsfi “{‘l1& giaintifi? further
contczzés, thai the dizféndants by playing fiaué abtaineé 3 will fram the
z-7<_\-Wu
common prop0sit0r6Basappa Patél and as such the same is iilegal ;~;'t2d.:.x'z'ot'
binding an the parties. Accerdingly the piaintifi filed 0.3. t '
to declare that he is eutitied for 154*' share in the giaint sc21é€Iu§£:::§Li§'3'§érti4_ésV '
and to declare the wilt dated 23.19.3995 as illégal zgrxdtiot di1V:fi;x: '?1."_'
parties, The defendants entereci appearana-e__.befofe.,ti{:
written statement inter alia denying the piaifitifi'
that the Wilt dated 28.10.199.55 of
plaading:-33 the Triai Court :v€.ij£sues for its
cansideration.
I. the life time of his
:ha”$._~*c– effectsd partition regarding the
firapéztiest the property not by mates and
t .. hgunég ttiefijze §;f:§§$:?
iwhefizatf the fuzther grows that, the 2*” and 3’6
3 – d;{£:f§t:$£:1;ts:’_1..§1ave played fraud and influencing the: late
}:Pa£ei ta axecute the wilt in favour of the 2″ and
* ;§;fi’1.defenéants incluéing the propextias which were afloited
AA ; niacin’ ths paiupatti and the said alleged Wil} dated
j A 28.i§.2995isbog:1s’?
Vt Wheihar the: piaintifi’ is entitled flzrr declamtian anti aise
entitieé for ifdfh share in $126 fantziiy properfies and aim
segaratar ;}Q§S$§§i€}{‘£ as per the palupatti we: the suit
ssheduie property?
Q9-x,/u
IV, Wlxat ozrciar or €§&€I’6’€?
4. Befere the Trial Crimrt the gziaitatiff examinad
and got marked Ex:.P.i ta E§x.P.2.1. The f
witnesses as D.W.1 {G E}.W.4 and get marked z:néTV.,’£§X;I.f)».V2.:
Tfial Cam 0:: appreciatim: ef the p¥éé&§:gsé <)raI '
séziéenafi an resaré ham that t31e:*&1sfflencIz§;*if§§"}iz;%$§22faf1§e:;1 to §§§.?sw, 'Egg will
dated 28.38.1995. Hm paiupatti a temporary
arrangement and thegje. -'no '_j_v-§'g¢%if'9::j'divf;gIy under the
impugied judgnen;"tigé_«.}f::i%%;i–C»;§jzi%£_V;l§ci*e§;i of 9:332:15 declaring
that he is e1j:tii:i¢:,d_ "t¥1z:'~.;:§a;=i:Vint scheduia properties.
Aggieved bjfithis 60$"? the defendants filed an
appeai 1:: RA. 49413603 C3185? to be partly aliowed
m.edi£fs:i:1g f;_iis"juégnen€'{;~f_ Trii.-31 Court is the effect that the piainiifi" is
:'én £i;£3£:d ?af'4§'.L the piaim scheduie properties and aha Wili dated
28. the parties. Hence, this secand appeal by this:
” éalmczaggzs-…__
‘~11’ ” argamenis an bofh the side and gseraseé the entire appeai
6. ‘Has feiatianship between {ha parties is not in dispute. Further it
His not ‘:22 dispute {£133 the plain: gchesduie pfepmies are the gain: famiiy
pmpezfigieg, If is the speséfic gas: Sf gaiaintifi’ that in the year E991 there
T5, A raaéing eff the writtm: siatemani flied by the §€3fE${‘l”£§.-‘Zi:.I:1?£3: ‘.
slearljg establishas that the cormnon propositor Basappa Patfl.~c;xeci§§Té.é*L:”‘a~« « *
regstered wiil on 2819,1995 bequeating th¢»A_§c{1t1t fajziily’ ” £1’1_:’.eg’3 e”1’V$£§s
amang the fioint fazniiy mcmbers. This wiil ?I
admitted by the defendants that ti1e3%»TVp3;’§icipzV1i:c;1’V’i:%
exacuiien and regstraiian of the wiil. F fclefézdants
that just befere the wt]; came rc;;§i§£§§{é;Ei:«”Cemm0n fifipositor
Basappa Patil was an inpatient in ~:é{§s§:.~i that Basapga
?a£i1 was mat the abs0;iufé’«:g§§%;ner izgf L?1§:énti:*€ properties and
:13 such he had :13 ‘Both the Courts below
by taking t11c%:;;Vfe”éirci.:%§i;;§t;1t;§;§:€§§?,§Vhté’cg§fisids¥éiiéfi’v’rightly heki that the will
Ex.D.1 313 Iii)? gfiscfafii 31$ such the same is not binéing
on the parties. filis cpncuficsfut fziiéing of both the Comm heiow is in
v;1C*3t}fdaIl§}6′;’33:’i’E}17;.Ea£§§’ andAAI”‘fm:1…r.a;= jtzstifiable gonad to interfere with the
skiing; ” ‘~
8. “Ear $1.6′ raééam stated abeve, I fné no substan£;’al quzzstion of
” ” ‘A 12523’: £313: arises”fo§” my cmlsiéeratisn in this secend appeal. Accordingly,
‘§3§e_éf;p¢31.is.AAfiereb3’ éésmissad.
Sd/-é
Iudgg
{R83 1 3342939