RSA No.335 of 2006
This regular second appeal is filed under __Section
100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment
and decree dated 29.10.2005 passed in R.A.N'o.r_6-;/2004
on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr. ort), Rerr,~diVsrrii.ssihg
the appeal and confirming the judgment anddecree' 'dated;
25.07.2001 passed in O.S.No.80/1992 _or1,v_t'i1eV'file._ofthe
Civil Judge (Jr.Dr1.] Ron. f "
This regular second appeal':'com_iing
this day, the Court delivered-the following:a"" ' 0
J U D GlllVI.ll§..N._T 2
This second appeal against the judgment
and decree dated 29.110-.9Qvo5-- pssssespgsrr the learned Civil
Judge (sr. 4..i::)..I41.:l'ti:?i:ii::'l.___{O~rll:,« 1ilrtfR.A.i§ie.6/2004 dismissing the
appea.l__Jth.,e"' iidppeliishts and confirming the
judgment by the learned Civil Judge
(Jr.Dn.), o'Isg.ii.r§c;_i8o / 1992.
22."'Appellantlslllifirere plaintiff Nes.2 and 3 in the Trial
No.1 Kalakanagouda, husband of the
defe_nda'nterespondent herein died during the pendency of
the_ appeal before the lower Appellate Court. The suit was
*filedt’:seeking to set aside the gift deed dated 24.07.1985
RS/-\ No.35 of 2006
and deceased Kalakanagoucgla, all of whom were brothers)
in favour of the defendant, the Wife of plaintiff No.1-
Kalakanagouda. The three brothers gifted of
properties in favour of the defendant»Sh–e:ltaiii?a’:
registered gift deed dated 24.o7,..,1.9_s5.
defendant, through the help 0
the signatures of the plaintiffs-..Whoi’Veere
and got created a gift,cleed fraud,,.coercion and
undue influence. the allegation.
that ‘plllaiirrtiffs ‘failed to establish that the
registerellclégift the result of fraud, coercion,
unchxe “influeln’ce_a_nAd. threat exerted on the plaintiffs. The
‘ VCi0′,,l,1’JLS_l’;}€lQiW’ have also found on facts, upon appreciation
“‘eividen”¢el,’.1’ilhoth oral and documentary that Ex.D6
partition “deed dated 10.08.2005 which was executed
A subsequent to the gift deed partitioning the properties
among the plaintiffs made mention of the registered gift
$7