{"id":128737,"date":"2008-05-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-05-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008"},"modified":"2015-03-17T21:56:02","modified_gmt":"2015-03-17T16:26:02","slug":"shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008","title":{"rendered":"Shivappa G vs Rudramma on 30 May, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Shivappa G vs Rudramma on 30 May, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: V.Jagannathan<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH comm' 0:2 KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDated the 30\"! day of May 2008\n:BEFORE: '___\nTHE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE : v.JAGANN2\u00a7;T'Hm\u00a7.f:    _\nREGULAR SECOND APPEAL No. I. % T' 1\n\nBETWEEN :\n\n1. Shivappa G, V. .\nS\/o Patek Rangappa,\nAged about 55 years.\n\n2 . G. Basava1*ajapp%1';'v~ ._ _\nS\/o Patc1Ranga;3pa--,. '--   \nAged about 4?  f\n\nBoth give'    \nR\/<2 4Santh;ehcHnur V.i11agc,i;  \n\n '   \n Disf:i'ict~ -"5'__?_'_'? \n T'  X"      ...Appc1]ants\n\n" _  I\u00a5fg!\\\u00e94:aiz-tttxash, Advocate. )\n\nwe :.\n\n    a'\n\n" ' T. 'Jill O' G_O'\u00a7!Efda Siddalingappa,\n\nV' about 55 years,\n\nR] O Santhebennur Village,\n V-Navzrat Betmgere Village,\n~~ Ch\ufb02dcajajur, Holalkem Taluk,\n"shitradurga -- 565 053.\n\nM2.  G.Mal.lika1ju11appa,\n\nS\/0 Patel Rangappa,\n\nAged about 47 years,\n\nAgrziculturist, R] o Santhebezmur\nVillage, Channagiti Taiuk,\n\nDavanagere District - 5??' 552.\n\n.. . Respondents<\/pre>\n
Regular Second Appeal \ufb01led under Section 100 of the
\nC.P.C. against the judgment and decree dated I9-3.2007
\npassed in R.A.No. 317\/2004 on the \ufb01le of the Adcit. Seaeitms
\nJudge 65 Presiding O\ufb01cer, Fast Track Court-l<\/p>\n
partly allowing the appeal and modifying theWj:11dgrment
\ndecree dated 6.9.2004 passed in. O.S.4l’lo._’_’  1:116; <\/p>\n
\ufb01le of the Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.en;.,) &.”\\J–_M.;:F’C\u00ab’-“,, .ehan\ufb01ag-;;_~i.~~:. <\/p>\n
This appeal coming for  the L’<\/p>\n
court delivered the follawing :  _<\/p>\n
Heard    appellants.\n<\/p>\n
2.   V against the concurrent
\nfmdixigslof  below in respect of the suit<\/p>\n
\ufb01led , bylktliiee  for partition and separate<\/p>\n
 V’  –.  of  in the suit schedule properties.<\/p>\n
  Vl\ufb01dedecreed the suit of the plaintiff in O.S.No.<\/p>\n
;1999 lam held that the plaintiff is entitled to use<\/p>\n
 n all the suit schedule properizies by metes and<\/p>\n
  lxulnds.\n<\/p>\n
V  The appeal preferred by the first defendant and<\/p>\n
one G.Ba-savarajappa [who was not a party in the trial<\/p>\n
court) in R.A.No. 317\/2004 was allowed in part only to<\/p>\n
J’<\/p>\n
W I<\/p>\n
the extent of partial modi\ufb01cation of the judgment and<\/p>\n
decree of the trial court inasmuch as the lowef.e’;\ufb01jei1ate<\/p>\n
court, though held that the piaint3’\ufb01’ is  ‘”1  <\/p>\n
share, it had confined the sanae\ufb02oniy    91′ <\/p>\n
176\/ 1P, S.No. 269 and a<\/p>\n
No. 676, and held that as;  1\/sr\u00e9
\nshare in each of  e\ufb01exi\ufb01oeed above
\nand ordered a’   as modi\ufb01ed
\nby it. It of Vappellate court in
\nR.A.No.    by the appellants
\n  rendered by the
\n1owe1″ apLpelVlate_@   ‘ ” ‘ .\n<\/p>\n
4′._;’ ” The .Vfa::1;Vs’   brief necessary for the purpose of<\/p>\n
  : of._VtI1is appeal are to the e\ufb01ect that plaintiff<\/p>\n
 ._ \ufb02ed the suit for partition and separate<\/p>\n
 of her 1\/ 3rd share in the suit properties by<\/p>\n
V’   *eo;1te1i’di11g that the original propositus Rangappa had<\/p>\n
 sons  Siddaliragappa (husband of the plainti\ufb01),<\/p>\n
V  Murigeppa, Shivappa (I)efendax1t~ 1), Basavarajappa<\/p>\n
(Appellant-2), Hamnnanthappa (since dead), and<\/p>\n
Malljkaxjunappa (Defendant-2), and the plaintiff, being<\/p>\n
the wife of Siddalingappa, contended that t11e1’e.._jWas a<\/p>\n
partition in the family during the time off of<\/p>\n
Rangappa and that was e\ufb01ected under a_ ” x <\/p>\n
dated 10.12.1932 and, in the  med ” to u<\/p>\n
properties and a house property  <\/p>\n
the p1a;i;nti\ufb01’ and defendante\u00e9iandvh 2-  ae
\nthe said defendants fwtele   of the
\nfamily, the pxamtnf J t   in the suit
\nproperties   she had to file<\/p>\n
the    .\n<\/p>\n
5.  ‘ogo their part, took up the
\neontentixoxtt  ettbeequent to the partition that took<\/p>\n
  me  1982, the p1aimm’ and defendants-1<\/p>\n
‘   extent of two acres thirty guntas in item<\/p>\n
” r~:Io;\u00ab2 tiiere was an oral partition between the first<\/p>\n
t\\n2to~.tiefex1dants and the plainti\ufb01 and in the said<\/p>\n
A  A_pt.\u00e91″;A\u00a7tit:io11, S.No. 176\/ IP measuring two acres \ufb01fteen<\/p>\n
guntas fell to the share of the first defendant and the<\/p>\n
southern portion of two acres fell to the share of the
\nplaintiff and the second defendant was allotted two<\/p>\n
acres thirtynine guntas in S.No. 269 and the three
\n}<\/p>\n
.1<\/p>\n
ankaxla house was also divided into three  and<\/p>\n
the plajnti\ufb01’ got the middle share and \ufb021e.’otl3er.:.’tWo<\/p>\n
portions were allotted to defendants\u00e9l.  <\/p>\n
respectively. It was the furthe’fdoaee_ of  di’ <\/p>\n
that, acting upon the oral the V’<\/p>\n
to sell her two acres “land.   Wot” one
\nKamalamma by  dated
\n20.1 1.1990 and latex?    sold his share
\nir: favour of  strength of the
\nageemeflt:  and, therefore, there
\nare   and the suit is,
\ntherellozje,”\n<\/p>\n
67 ‘ ;’ ” Based above stand taken by the parties, the<\/p>\n
   as many as \ufb01ve material issues and<\/p>\n
  iszstie-1 in the af\ufb01nnative and so also issue-4.<\/p>\n
Is’sues–\u00ab2′,~  and 5 were answered in the negative. In<\/p>\n
 * otherhvlrords, the trial court held that the plaintiff has<\/p>\n
 that the suit properties are the joint family-<\/p>\n
‘ V ‘lproperties of the parties and the defendants had failed<\/p>\n
to establish that a partition had taken place and also<\/p>\n
held that the defexiants had also \ufb01led to prove plainti\ufb02”<\/p>\n
OJ<\/p>\n
having disposed of item No.2 of the suit property.<\/p>\n
Following the said \ufb01ndings, the suit of the plcfurrtiffitras<\/p>\n
decreed by holding that she is entitled to  <\/p>\n
all the suit properties.\n<\/p>\n
‘7. Aggrieved by the judjgmpentl   L.<\/p>\n
court, the first defehdant iorte  who
\nare the appellants  said judgment
\nbefore the lower   317\/2004
\nand the     the judgment of
\nthe triale   having proved her
\nentitiementloff  the suit properties, but the
\nleamedjtldge   appellate court held that the<\/p>\n
   out of three items viz, S.Nos.\n<\/p>\n
‘ .:.’1’?6 .._and house bearing khaneshumari No. 676.<\/p>\n
” Itls jeedlgment of the lower appellate court that is<\/p>\n
 in question by the appellants herein.<\/p>\n
 to 4_  have heard the learned counsel for the appellants<\/p>\n
“‘V.VVlr1″respect of the concurrent \ufb01ndings of fact of the courts<\/p>\n
l V  below. The only contention put forward by the learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the appellants is that both the courts<\/p>\n
><\/p>\n
…g<\/p>\n
7<\/span>
\ncommitted error in coming to the conclusion that the<\/p>\n
defendants have failed to prove that the  <\/p>\n
sold one item of the property to one  <\/p>\n
this \ufb01nding is erroneous beca1_1se,__  e _ <\/p>\n
produced Ex.D~1 to prove    <\/p>\n
property mentioned  1. to  Vwjife or L’<\/p>\n
Nanjundappa. ‘1’her.efore,l- leis.  it that nrrhen once
\nRudramma had sole’   the
\nsaid    once again
\nwithin use i   3. partition of the
\n   that there was an oral
\n  between Rudraxnma and<\/p>\n
defendants-ii and 2.  As such, both the courts below<\/p>\n
 \u00ab  error in not accepting the said contention<\/p>\n
I “‘   <\/p>\n
9–…__ In  light of the above submissions made and<\/p>\n
 AA  tile evidence of the witnesses being placed for my<\/p>\n
  by the learned counsel for the appellants, the<\/p>\n
 V .–only point for consideration is Whether any substantial<\/p>\n
question of law iwvolved in this appeal so as to<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
case. An entirely new point raised for the
\nfirst tixne before the High Court is
\nqI..16S\ufb01OI1 involved in the case unless   ”
\nto the met of the matter. It will, unease,’
\ndepend on the facts
\neach case whether a qtiestioif of   if
\nsubstantial one and\u00bbiiinjsro1vedv_’ii1  on 3
\nnot; the paramount””i’eoi:era11
\nbeing the needfor
\nbetween the  to do
\njustice at    necessity
\nof   of any iis.\n<\/p>\n
_ ____  _   of law will also
\n__sitnation, Where the legal
\nApo_sition-._   either on account of
\n _ expfess ‘provisions of law or binding
\n 3_j\u00a7I’eceden”ts.,_..hnt the court below has decided
\nV .,iv’ti1en1atter, either ignoring or acting contrary
\nit ‘iegal principle. In the second type of
\n  the substantial question of law arises
\n” not because the law is still debatable, but
\ntnecause the decision rendered on a material<\/p>\n
question, violates the settled position of law.”<\/p>\n
11. Keeping the above parameters as laid down by the<\/p>\n
Supreme Court, I have carefully examined the matexial<\/p>\n
placed at this stage. The main thrust of the appellants’<\/p>\n
3\/<\/p>\n
1)<\/p>\n
\u00a30<\/p>\n
counsel is that Rudramma had sold one of t1 1__e suit<\/p>\n
items to K a under E:-:.D-1 and, <\/p>\n
the courts were in error in holding that  ‘<\/p>\n
taken place. In this regard,  tiled’;<\/p>\n
reasons assigned by both the    <\/p>\n
there is no evidence piaced..sho\\X?  ” ‘Via did’ i<\/p>\n
sell one of the suit ‘items 13jx..so–1 ato”KaSma1arm11a.
\nThe learned judge ot course of his
\nanswer to    discussed this
\naspect of  that Ex.D-1 is not a
\nsale  _ it  an agreement of sale
\n evidence of I).W.1 makes it<\/p>\n
clear” 1 is a sale deed. The trial court has<\/p>\n
 .,    it is the case of the defendants<\/p>\n
 ._  that Rudramma executed the sale<\/p>\n
deed  stamp paper, but D.W.3, who is none other<\/p>\n
 ~  husband of Kamaiamma, has admitted that the<\/p>\n
\ufb02dovcument of ageement of sale was written on a plain<\/p>\n
 paper. Further, the sig1ature of the plainti\ufb01’ was not to<\/p>\n
be found in the fKS 6 of Ex.II)~1.<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
14. For the aforesaid reasons and having regard \u00a7\u00a7;”‘m,g~’.  _,_
\nguidelines laid down by the Apex Court with    3
\nthe power of the High Court to    AV<\/p>\n
concurrent \ufb01ndings cf fact, in 1E:f\u00a7;”‘I\u00a716W,”‘f1()V’ subest\u00e9ag\ufb01ial <\/p>\n
questien of law arises for e0nside_1_fei\ufb01e1:..
\nand the appeal, therefore,   hence the<\/p>\n
same is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
eke] —<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Shivappa G vs Rudramma on 30 May, 2008 Author: V.Jagannathan IN THE HIGH comm’ 0:2 KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE Dated the 30″! day of May 2008 :BEFORE: ‘___ THE HON’BLE MRJUSTICE : v.JAGANN2\u00a7;T’Hm\u00a7.f: _ REGULAR SECOND APPEAL No. I. % T’ 1 BETWEEN : 1. Shivappa G, V. . S\/o Patek Rangappa, Aged […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-128737","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nShivappa G vs Rudramma on 30 May, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shivappa G vs Rudramma on 30 May, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-05-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-03-17T16:26:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shivappa G vs Rudramma on 30 May, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-05-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-17T16:26:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1332,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008\",\"name\":\"Shivappa G vs Rudramma on 30 May, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-05-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-17T16:26:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shivappa G vs Rudramma on 30 May, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Shivappa G vs Rudramma on 30 May, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shivappa G vs Rudramma on 30 May, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-05-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-03-17T16:26:02+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shivappa G vs Rudramma on 30 May, 2008","datePublished":"2008-05-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-17T16:26:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008"},"wordCount":1332,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008","name":"Shivappa G vs Rudramma on 30 May, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-05-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-17T16:26:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shivappa-g-vs-rudramma-on-30-may-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shivappa G vs Rudramma on 30 May, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128737","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=128737"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128737\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=128737"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=128737"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=128737"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}