R.S.A.NO.1130/2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2010 BEFORE . TI-IE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE _
Reqular Second Apnea!
BETWEEN: ‘ ‘I V’
SR1 ERAPPA
AGED ABOUT 59 YRS
S/O LATE SR1 MUNEPPA
R/OE SIRE SANDRA VILLAS-E~
HUTHUR HOBLI ~_ A 7
KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT 563 1015* _ APPELLANT
{BY SR1 K J JAGADEESHA,’
AND:
1 SR} _
AGED ABOUT 52i,YRS
S /’O LATE MUNEPPA .. ‘
R/ O SIRE SAN DRA V£i.LA£3E
HDTHURHOBL1 ” .
KOLAR’11A.LUK AND~.D1STR1OT 563 101
2 CSRIASRINIVASA TTTT
A AGED ABOUT 55 YRS
* –. _ S/O ‘LATESRI MUNEPPA
A , R,/O..S1RE..SA.NDRA VILLAGE
._ ” HU’1’HUR HOBL1
A V ‘KOLAR-TALUK AND DISTRICT 563 101
‘, 3 ” S.1viT.. NANJAMMA
AG-ED ABOUT 81 YRS
” * aw/O LATE SR1 MUNEPPA
{R/O STRE SANDRA VILLAGE
” HUTHUR HOBL1
KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT 583 101
‘4 SMT. KONTHAMMA
AGED ABOUT 40 YRS
R.S.A.No.1130/2007
D / O LATE SRX MUNEPPA
W/O SR1 SHNAPPA
R/O SULIKUNTE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI
BAN GARPET TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT 563 101 REsFoN.I_’)EdI§ITs”« _
{BY SRI Y R SADASHIVAREDDY, ADV. FOR R1 8: R2:
R3 81 R-4,» SERVED)
THIS RSA IS FILED U/S 100 V-OF”-C’.PC*_’ AGAINST THE
JUDGEMENT AND DEGREE DT. 1p0.01…,2p0o7t_ PASSED’;
RA.NO.22/I999 ON THE FILE oF THE, PP.L.DISTRICT JUDGE,
KOLAR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND ‘CONFIRFy€IN’G’ THE.
JUDGEMENT AND DEGREE DATED 17.02.1999 * _PAS3–ED .9IN
os.No.27/1994 ON THE FILE oF THE,AD,DL.CIV’1L tFUD_oEa(sR.DN.)
KOLAR. . * ..
THIS RSA COMING ‘Q_N”«.FOR ADI)IIssIvo~N, THIS” DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLL{)V’JIN-CU?» * U
This No.1. I have
heard the for the parties and
peruseddt’-_the_ the two Courts below.
Concurrent’ by the Courts. The trial Court
has decreed’ «suit by granting 1/5″‘ share to the
RV’-E.p1aiV.ntiffI Rpreisp-ect of the plaint ‘A’ and ‘B’ schedule
properties«.’.V’cx_c.ept item No.14 of plaint ‘A’ schedule
Rpropertyviii }The judgment of the trial Court is confirmed by
A “:the Vdldower Appellate Court. Both the Courts, on a proper
..__’u”‘apRprec1at1on of the evidence on record, have rejected the
plea of oral partition pleaded by the appellant/defendant
I
/-
~\\/
R.S.A.N0. 1 130/2007
No.1. In my opinion, no substantial question of law arises
for determination in this second appeal. No ground to
admit the appeal. The appeal is accordingiy dismissed. .’ ”
Appeal dismissed.
S
hkh / ata