Smt Venkatalakshmamma vs Yeshodamma on 9 July, 2008

IN THE HIGH csum or KARHATAKA, BANGAI{QE'2"Ef:A. k
HATED ms um cam my or JULY m:     '   K

BEFORE

nm H-£>1~rBLE nmwsncs Igixngefimomn ms    V

 

1 SMT    
w/EN%    %
sammAn«3nmn£.e;2!Ac%A1%   'H

2 SIv1'!§'JAYALflfl.t§ *  
   -   mm  mmrcmxwappa
 % aeE3:gfa«arT49Y3ARs
   Rift.-"1* Tfifim,  CROSS.
 ;<:1~ARDE1i
sammammmsnem
 -- 560 0:27

  % sg<:3£g?PA GARDEN
  O O    sayzmmmamaxaean
   - 560 027

 APPELLANTS

 O  .- RUPERT M ROSARIO, amwocxmy

fiw



'VII:-l'I\i VII I\l'|l\I'nl'II-l'II\l'l I

Ina! I uuunu  Iu-|I\|1r|u-u\.r\ nlwn \..\JI.ll\I VT AMHIVHEHAH l'1E\.7l'! \..|JUKl U!' RHKNAEAKA HIGH COURT OF   

§_':_11._.13=-

msnomhm, W10 BAIEAIAH
AGED 5.33.1'? 59 YEARS

RIC} Rf} 111212, 5?" A CROSS
mzvssz m3m:,YEsI~IwAHT1-11==!JxAw
ammmzzsanm-560322. " 

{BY SR1 : <3 BALAKRISI-BIA  C312'  

am» EPA filed u; s.95<$£ ¢m%Lki.w:j'%m¢ guamn;
and decree dt.22.3.€36  Q.$;2i%G1';'9?-'on the file

cf the XIV fiéd1.{Iity'  (SCH-28],

partly    ""c1e,;':1a;.raa'tix1-:3, possession,

m  this day, the
Caurt  " . _'

 

   appellants have called in
 and dacrw datefi 22.G3.% in

 by than 14%: Ac1d1.<::ity cm
  City damaging the suit daeclarirlg the
  owner: :21' the suit prmrty and that she is

   gr panasaeaainn {sf the win pmpmy. Further, the
  warm the aerenaam to ham mm t}:1¢

 " pas3a,s5%31'1 05 the suit p1-apm't}r within: a period of six

mcnths. .:v

63"





OURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR'|i.0F'_;KARNATAKA HIGH COUR? OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH. COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

2. Appenanm are the defendanm     T & 
renpmxleerlt is the plmmsa befime the  
sales cf ennveniencac, the  

rafiarred 'bu their sum heme  cm-a,  

3. The pmw   agent" 1:
the defmdw    of

'rm ¢]aim__  an that undexr a
Rapltezweci  1953, she acquizrad the
agzhcdukg   of the acheduie prropcrty
  has paid up to clans urea.

   mama to be in possession of

  as mm ta}-m. any the amen of

   the dermam cm are: his legal

"  are wnfir::::.1im_ in poasessfion. Despite
 O  mquasm and mm, the defimdanta refused
 fiumte the schedule property and thweafom the plain'dfi'

fihdfl:1ea:uitbefh1*etIt1e'I'1'ial{3o11rt.

6/,Lk-J\'



OURT or KARNATAKA HIGH COURT _O'Fv-KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT op KARNATAKA HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

4. The defendants mtmd   ' 
ma: Ccurt filad writrtsm mmnm    
title of am plenum. 'rm defe2;dg;:tov'fa;ftk§er §o:an¢na¢dj%'%% 

that they are ?m. possession  
schsdule gnropezrty in   of
Sale dated 13.05.1963   af the

mhedule pa;'op-crgf:   *  derenam

darned." the mm  pV}FIxrn'.Ifi" ' % %  1 'a  '

5.

 the Trial Court

framed tin:    '1ss11:e:-43:»

aw  % jéi=»'fF'«i13t?'prv
hushaasdhadwaynightmthesadtschedule

uwrharthaselfmldher

 ]%  . ra pamfl pa the husband
 of d€f-mama No.1 and fi.:£her' ofdegvmdam

7tvputupwnstmdienI'nflw.sufi

 fiww?

3% pkfinnjfipmvm that Murziehixmqppa

 fizmad houae eonsisfring mof of asbwms
in the suit praperg mad cantirmed in

permimiue passfihz cf the suit schedule
pmpem?

Whather plcdtttifl' prams that suit is
mca%1tumab£efi':fliepr'ase71t_fbnn?

Ow...



OURT OF KARNATAKA I"-HGH COURT A.0F"_KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 3-HGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF XARNATAKA H!GH COURT

W)

Wherhw plainfifi is entitled fin" ~ 

thesuitpmperly?

HO piafrfifpmvw       'V
Rs.800J'- per month ficm  (if A'

P*'0:J'&d5'

3% degfwadzaxtpxégm-:  foi-

misjoinda-' and  hf friaawsgwy

 

  $,: f A

 is the aumer

 p!mnh"  mat Court fa:-2 pad is

 V

 v  Trial Cleurt, pzainmmaumaa her
 am husband an P'W--~1 and got

X    Em;-; ;'i-=1 to P25. On behafi" of defendants,
O'  was mused' as aw-1 ard gut marked
O OO3.,~.-%.:O.iOm1 a:e D18. Am warm mm the mm mm on

 aw the  , am]. and dacunlentary
 the Trial Ceurt passed the impugned judgnmxt

aw"



uvvnl vr n.r~mnHIHI\I-\ Hlufl LUUR? OE

AKARNATAKA HIGH COUR1 or KARNATAKA HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA HIGHCOURT or KARNATAKA HIGH couar

and deems ¢iex:ree:ing the suit of the plaintiif. " 

appml.

5. M-.Rupert M Roaariq, the    

the appenam; amuzanm  tug 
PW-1 in mfly 3 hear my  
hnwladge gum: thg    property.
In the abaencse cf  can be
placed on the   I-{cider Fwd.
The    whcthcazr there are
other LR;    than Eeramma and

  are mt ao=mpet¢11t to wecute. the

' "  in the mm are amugh to rim: the question
 ma adverse pmmsan and the um Court
 Mraizaa to: give a Ending on the same. He rm-um
 that the Trial Court mmmed an mmr in mt

mfing intn cmmideratian tk entire  aaanflable on

W"



BURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURTA.§)§'_;KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

record. The Trial Ctmrtlaaa. faiiedtn  a clear  V.
as to th»: nature am-.1~m paamaion es" the   

decree of the Trial com is 1immOmOm a¢:%O a§ide; 

:1} 

fxi) AIR    
Advomte fozi plahzfifi supp-arm the
 decree af the Triai Court. He
 oral evidi of PW--1 and the

  by tha pmnm' am éonaideresd by
  He cantomda that in the facm and

   cf this mm, there '3 nu ma fiat the
'V   examine hm-wlfas a wfixtma before the Trial

 V:~uCaurt arni !m* man-exzaflnatiaxx is not fiatal 1:: the mag.

7L \/Va'



'URT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT  i(;_.ARNATAi(A HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT E

13 R.I£'A...l%

8. Heard arguxnenw on both the 

perused the emit: moorda.

9. Defendanes mnmndwrhgt * 

the owner of the schedule  
an agrwt of salsa  1s.d6%.19a3
   wjoyment of
the     Sale Daed
dated  pxamzm specmaa that
ztmmdm    are the mother
mg    Sale Deed mam specifics
  Yellappa and 11': mother

   the schaiule property mm: the

M    an zmmgso. in am writim1

% 1  the 'Trial Court, the deramm have not
  fihat atbm-* than Emamma and aalzawathamma,
V  am nthaer legal r%¢=,:.z:3.tat:i'sa'es af dewfi Yefiappa
 Ofwho have not jainad m the. mccution or am Sale: Deed an

24.09.1963

. In this regard, is sufimd in the

dry

LR!’ OF KAIUNIATAKA HGH COURT O_F’Kzf\RNA’fAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

11 R.E.A..l.%?ze’..Q5

crmrexanfingfinn nf I-“W4. Further, DW-1 ”
avidmoe has mt stated arxythm with regard I I
Legal nalprmenmtive ofYe]1appa. ‘ _

rawrd wtabléahtx the hat

mgismedsasa Deedintheyaar
in the name. at the pzajmfifirn the
Bangalore Chy mm ‘3
delay. in trarmfgr. the plainfifi
and cannot be :1
ground m has nan title war the
schedule :3 a mgsmma Sale Deed
I’«c»m1fE’ct$_4: and payment oftsanea by
the fact that pramuw in the

property. ‘l’h1’a evidenca on record
V _» fiat, plainfifl has proved that aha ‘8 the ewzwr
I I I with the Isarm.

10. It is not in dispum that pl.a1:1t1fi’a husband
andPUrwerof}!:ttm’m3rI-ioldaaa-Byraiahwaamzfizunedas

<&_~.;-'\/'

URT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT or KAKNI-\!l-\l\.H nlun uwunl

12 mmmm

PW-1. Araading of am] evidence of FW'-1 with 2
the salsa Deed, Ex.P1"r khatha cndoramni; u
'no P12 and P1'? 1:: P21, the tn

eamhlishw the amuxce of gf

pmparty. The mum
Muxtickfimaappa mmed of am
15.05.1953 w-£th Yellgappag. pzmuztr
and scheduh
yefiappa, Eeramma and
Dead in know: of the
af apecific plea and evidence
$1 repreamatives of Yefiappa, the

13¢ * 1% mncluding that p1eLintifi'has proved
_ title over the schedule property. In
cirmmmtancaa of this casc, the non-

per-soazfn nntfiatalbo the mm.

11. The learned manual for the appellants}
%x:lamvs c:u:sn’bm:i that even in the absmme of upecifi:

dc.

URT OF KARNATAKA HKGH COURT O?-OKARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH CUUKI Ur KAKNAIARA ruun uuuru

13 mmlmm

m&n and achqausaasion, the

admitted facm in the case mmwaws the Tx~ia1.§j<:firt '
mmidm the sang. I decline to accept V'

the iearnead caramel for the

poaifiuen 91' my that the plea
posaeaaiwn ought 2:: be
m be framed and capyzaorulnmww m the
partim. In the it in
wt "pm that the Trial
Court oug11£._§:–_ am gueatinn of adverse
posaasskinn. evidence an
gaggbaianag mg that in the year 1968, the
m …We Wm, under a

The tax paid meipu prcducecl by
that from the year 1973, the

A 3 the rm Furtrm, Ex.I36 produoud by

_ as. representation dated 25.01.1979 tn the.
Cammkainner, Banmabre, ' 312%: that
'V=vp]aimm's husband Bymppa is wing ms' the schedule

pzupertyazzdclnimingasawmramuuubfizag

WW

IURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF' i€_ARNATAKA HIGH COUR1' OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

1-!» R.E.£s…1.33LD§

Iiuiurlislfigapaandfifnmilymmhezwsarni

tn vacaba me achcadule property. Ex.P1§ is I " I
datnad 13.c3.197=9 wherein n
vacaba the schedule pmpcny I

a mmamm of Ra.1,mc;-.

mmhlkhm the fact that pnamm is
not hit by §in:itatinnI.’Qn
at the lcamed is
relied on by the
leamad to above: do not
It-.-.:::d an;.- urged by the
the raw stated above, I
an m intaarfiere with the smpupad

of the Trial Cceurt. On an other

ca’ the ‘h-321 Court is supporhad by
V K and tha name is in accordance with
masons sated above, the appeal in haneby

at .

15

corzsmcdion of my type an the *

6) T0 was eavezx, the Wdants, % saW i:§fi3v
dhi

£33.. :2: §E<zx<.. ".0 E80 :9: <xS.<zm5_ aopunou $0.: §E.<_…&§ mo .E.:.ou x.o_…., §<»<zx$._.. ..»c..»m:ou $9…. $_<»<z~_<x mo En.