Smt Boramma W/O Thippaiah vs Boravva W/O Late Thippaiah on 3 September, 2009

IN THE i'€IGH COURT OF KARMA TAKA A T BARGALORE'

muss mts 'ms 3*' my er SEPTEMBER, zeca j  _

SE?'-'ORE

me HONBLE me. .363 rice' mt. xgsm vA;vA.éA;vfi&A _ @ <

 

8E'§"'v"w'EE¥'~i:

srm". aommma Wf{) "¥"HtF'PA§AH
AGED AS*OL¥T 4:3 '(EARS .-

ecc: AGRECULTURE. _ '. 5
RIGNERALAGUNTE VELLAGE  ~ - --
CHALLAXERE TALUK;   A
CH%T¥§'.ADL3RGAStSTR£_CT  '

    A "'-V......fAF«*pELLAm
{av SR3.8ASAVARAJ :».a;;v;§.g:.;;::<;;<;4,~ Amy.)  

ANS:

BORAV'si}§ w;b"LA%'E TH§:?¥5&3.»%'»'H~.,'_.
AGEE} ABQUT as ',-'E.+~=;a.".--;:'~.=_, _ <  

G€C:AGR'3.€.f3ULTUR{~2 .   
RIG NEt'«?.Ai.i%»'f,3iJE'*»£TE va.LLAG§: _ "
{3HéU..LaKERETRLU.K

cacrsagrguazess. 3323?. V _ 

RES¥3Of'€f.}E";f~I'¥'

._ "  $833 'F~?.S..&'*~».!°§S Fii_E{3 UNDER SECTKFN 1% CF CPS A5335'-33?
THF. 'JU%3G?u'¥E¥_~E¥7" AND DECREE DATED 25.9.2807 PASSED 3%
R.A.f'«!4Q.46{2G34..£}N THE FELE {FF THE CWEL JUSGE {SFé'E3{'~é) CHALLAKERE
Di3§%1§¥SE3%N{3 THE RPPERL ms CONFtR§\?!§NG Tfifi .3§.3f.'.IG?v'§E£'«lT f's.N{}

~ .. _ g   -,{}E$R'EE FSATEB 233.2034 F'#\S3Ef3 ifs} G.S.NQ.'€me'2®2 SN THE FELE SF
V V " :}'i"'.!':';.~" ,r_'1'§D{},{§'EViL JUGGE {JR.{)N) SHALLAKERE.

'   '"T"rsis F3351 Ctfiitiifig an £13; ABMESSIGH this day, Thai':

  ccgurt delivered the follcvwingt



trying ta aiianate the same tn the prejudice sf her rights,

therefore, defendants are required is be restrainextiishy

means sf permanent injunction from disposing__:;'f'ihg  _

schednle pmperty by way of saie, rngzrtgag'9;"gé5F{ ~_:1::*"iiiiii _  ii  

3. First éefendant-respor£§!1~g:~'i\/  1; ii
She denied the case of the  
property is the joint famiiy  éngi :i.ii1e...i§:)iaintiff
is in faint possmsicm eff'  ::.V.==~"'_;VI_Ivv1'§:'=§ 'c:-r:§nr't**i:es"1<iac:i tiiét

the suit schecjasiiei; §;arop:;éVifii  h:e;ir~V:'.i;<;ig-;~ifv'a::§;iVuire:3 property,

the S3Wi€"'h§§iFiiQ.EE§$fi "§.f3fitéfi"EG--fi%ef by the Gevernmeht
in tim :ye$a'r.'_i3$?;58V saguvaii chi? was 3539

is;sued_vt<3  if: the  988 and that fine price far the

  nagas i$3ifi"'fiy her fathar and 'thus, she is the

 '--=::T}.§is+ii'°ié:f:f.fif the wit scheduie property, as such,

shAe~-..__Vh3$  ibsaiute right to deai with 'rim same in the

 4u'---VJ'i'!}3¥i¥'%éi'§i"I3 iika. She gist; cnntended fins': the suit fiied

  ;v:s§é"ii*xfi piainiiff far' we reiiaf (sf permanent injuncfiafi S

T  "ms? maintainabie, as size is ha? a ca-parcener sf ths

@



famiiy as such, she mnnat be deemed to be in iifiihf

passession of the pmperty.

4. On the basés of the pieaciings of  the';  " --«  

Triai Cmxtt framed severai  Aftétj

evidence, the triai court on aégsgssifienf csf :§f§e7.;srgViVV3.sdd %

documentary guidance ;_answeAréL§'  gvvfic 6 in
the negative, hniding  -faiied tn prove
that the suit scfigjagie    :{*'.;.a'::'niiy pfapuarty
and that sh§="i9;"»_i:*;  same. The T£'"i3i
mart af;$werTé;§§".  £fi'e"a;'firmative hoiding that
"time madam: hag%Wea that the suit scheduie

praperty i$'iL'i'es".*a§t;;.{1i'r§V<:* pmperty. in that View of the

 {the "fgfiai ¢¢ur2'ho;ding "mat the piainfrff is not

erifikiéga' ééiief as snught for, dismissed" tha suit.

 _ O5 "-«3pD._aai L'.i'?b y the piairztiff, Lawar Appeiiaie Cauft

V <:cznc§1ri.'é::i:' with the jufigmant of the trig? court and

 _'__~__'§:*;r:§§§~'sefiiJentiy, digmissefi the appeal Against these

'b



7. On the basis 9f the orai and dacumgxfiéify

fividemce pieced an record by the defe:1ci_$:iit" 

respondent, bath the Courts balmy »have"'c:e§jjc1jf':*§ér:t¥y u '*~ 

heid that me amoufit payabie *::<i.~4'ti*s,';'=,

grant of this iand was paid b3§'V.t:f33V_fat'§1érV:;s.'*:thév '§:¥éffe–ndéfii

No.1-respondent am by ijs2rVVV5'gs$fia;1d.,.' thérefrgrak the
suit scheduie praperty praperty af
defendant :"§;:§:;rv§u¢urrent finding
recercied v":§1sV:"ié} accoréance with the
evidanéémti§'é éf§3é$§f§. appearing for
appeiiagiis point out any perversity

in thg –s-.ai¢E'uf::'3.§},ih-g ' of"-thé. Csaurts belaw. The iearned

appefiant is net abie to paint out

"°§$*:*«_3'*f.__t'f?.'TieT' i:';g'::,'i_:;:V'£Ar 's;'vifiseiow have aither misread the evidence

V . €13" tfinittaizi f5' cxrmsider any mats:-zriaé evi-dame 9:2 recard.

K iiiég Véiéw of the matter, the cartcurrent judgment 53' the

« beiow do net 33$} for iiwterference by this Court.

" .'v"3"'l*':eref::n'e, the appeaf dafi nest invoive any questinr: sf

i