{"id":141753,"date":"2008-07-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-07-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008"},"modified":"2017-11-17T17:29:08","modified_gmt":"2017-11-17T11:59:08","slug":"indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008","title":{"rendered":"Indramma W\/O Srinivasamurthy vs Sharadamma W\/O Narayanappa on 21 July, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Indramma W\/O Srinivasamurthy vs Sharadamma W\/O Narayanappa on 21 July, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: K.Ramanna<\/div>\n
IN 'mE HIGH COURT OF' KARNA'i'\ufb01;KA AT BA_!\u00a7'G!\u00a7LC\u00a7_!_\u00a7\u00a7'$:_.V  _\n\nDATED THIS THE 218* my 0;? JU1..\u00a5,,.A2msAfj ._ 3\nBEF0R\u00a3;  %' V\nTHE HON'BLE MR.3I?_J4STi(3;E._I{\"--RAMAi'\u00a7\u00a3?\u00a3.}$ Q\"  \n\nREGULAR FERST A\ufb01\ufb01\ufb01\u00e9ia. NO.  zao\u00e9,\n\nBETWEEN:\n\nINDRAMMA   '\n\nW\/<3 SRiN1VASA.Sf%1U'RTHEf V    :\n50 YRS, R\/A B;Ps.G\u00a7\u00a7LA3".;.}I\\"1'Ei;_ ' _'  " \nYESHWANT_I}'PUR HOEBLI     '\n\nBANGAL0R;3:_V N\u20ac}\u00a7_RfFH 'i'}\\L.\u00a7,i\u00a3{' *  Q:  \n\n APPELLANT'\n\n(BY SR3---.;< S   \u00e9ii\/SJAYAKAR ASSOCIIYFES,\n\nADV)\n\n\n\n $:H.A:2ADA:vim -------- ~ "\nwgo _N}'.RAYANAPPA\n\nV' "  3:3 Y'RVS.,RfA MYLASANDRA\n\n"R..'iFw...g:O3;LEi}E ms':\n\n\u00ab  KEIQGERE HOBL}\n B,_M~\u00a5(}$;LORE SOUTH TALUK\n\nSUKUNDAMMA @ SUNDAMMA\nW70 M.Ci.GURUM{}RTHY\n\n_ V  NO, 14(5), 21'\u00bb MAIN ROAD\n'  2269 BLOCK, IBALAJI ROAD\n\nTI-{YAGA RAJ\u00a3\u00a7NAGA?R\nBANGA LO}*v3E~2'S\n\n\n\n3 N M NAGARAJU\n\n4 SHIVAKUMAR\n5 VENKATARAYAPPA\n\n6 GOVINDAPPA\n\n7 JAGADESHA\n\n8 SHAMANNA _ L \n\n9 BE'I'T&SWAMY GOWDQ:-V.  _\n\n20 sANNAF'"P2\u00a5'i::jLA%:V1"4   \n\n11 Govi';\u00a7D:?\u00a5\u00e9\u20ace\u00a7\u00a7\u00a3i}'*'~. . V? \n\n.... ..   ,  V  . I E? F5\n12 }3RE\u00a7:N;$:'AsA':g\u00bb\u00a71r1\u00a7'm;;*;  RLSPOND M\n\nF'\u00a33TH4ERS_NAME x:irF*;93"*1\u00a7o D12\nN0? KNOWN  *   "\nALLD3 'T0 D121'\\R:E:.._}ZESIE}\u00a7NG\nA. ~ IN A PC1\u00a7_'TIC9N'OF'-THE MUNISWAMAPPA\n..  BUiLDING;V-BAGALKUNFE\n  Y_\u00a7f~SH7WAP?I'HPUR' HOBLI\n2 ' ; B13'J'5GALORE NORTH TALUK\n\u00ae WWLHA WA'  '"'-'f_{'B'\u00a3 ~v\u00a7'~\u00b0'\u00bb!_V"'- '7'~"A.'?_'_"'"f\u00a75*"l'*1"\\\\',\\\/. Pom 2-2, 3 5m\", 3414 _'F3\"'\ufb02~\\f-\ufb02\u00abN\\!\\v1AJ,\ufb02.i)V'f_o\u00a3\n ._ \"  31-'}'L$ERVi59 3 \"~f3*N Na-nae 1>rs9c--:n\/5:313 k9-;TH_;\nMd {.(g--\"{s'..~'.ii\u00bb9'\u00bb'>i\u00a7. '  5R'_R1**3'--.f_\"**'V'r~'I\u00b0\u00ab\" -Ms I'--or2R~I 5 '?.r\\.rU5~RAy4m.a6uAm*y,n-zsv Eon \ufb02-2,)\n\n_g__ \/; 'wigs APPEAL IS FILED UNDER' SECTION 96 cpc AGAINST'\n   THE Jim-GMEM. AND PQEIAMINARY DEGREE DATED 27\"-11~\nA .9 * \"  2239.1 PASSED {N O.S.NO.4',210\/198'? on THE FILE 0? THE XXII\n' ._  ;~.,m:)':~.c:TY cum. &; sasszcns JUDGE, BANGALOE maczeasxwc\n\n_  \"\"I'HEZ\"SUIT FOR pammow mm mssgssxem.\n\nTHIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR\nORDERS, COMiNCx ON FOR PRONOUNCEEENF THIS DAY, THE\nCGUR'I' DELIVERED THE E?'OLLOWiI'\u20acG::\n\n\n\n\n\n }\u00a7J7._\n\nThe appellant] defendant No.v41V..}1:\u00e9is  x\ufb01\ufb02}. \n\nappeal challenging the judgmc\ufb01t and  V\n\npassed in 0.3. No. 42 1.z3~;fV_198i?\"'g':1a:\u00a7::&;;: 5377.-_11-200':  the XXII\nAdditional City Civil and' \n2. For   of  'f\ufb02ivc: parties Wiii be\n\nreferred to; V' to' then: before the triai\n\n Tihe   Case leading to this appeal is\n\nthat the V' iii\u00e9xfi  stzit for paxtiiion and passczssljon\n\n   the n'.:\u00a7\n\n5. The 2nd defe3:1da':'\u00a3i'V.:._V\"V  afstatement\nsupporting the case   that she\nalong with plainti\ufb01'  Vagfgaa\u00e9git  entitle to 1,13\n\nsham   inmper\ufb01as and the rents\n iigf\u00e9xiiod that late Muniswamappa\nhad cxeciitzcfi anja?  0542-1932 and 02-04-1935.\n\n  ut'v5;'*Thc ;:n. the materials placed before it the trial court\n\nV.    all 5 issucs and 2 additionai issues have also been\n\n'  In support of the case of the pLaim:i\ufb01' she examined\n\n   'hi-::rseIf as PWK1 and also examined one Hanumanthappa and\n\nNarayanappa as PW2 and 3 and got marked Ex.P.1 to 9.\n\niv?\" \/ ,\n\n\n\nThe defendant No.1 got examined as D.W.I \n\ncxamincd one Siddagaxzgappa and Siddappa as:  \n\nand marked documents Ex.D.1  ~13, 4Tl1s\u00a7.V\u00a7i\u00a7f\u00e9\u00a7ici\u00e9i1t4.'_?Jo';2 V\n\nexamined hcrsclf as DW.-4 and   d11--L.; \n\nas DW.5. ' A _\n\n8. After oonsid\u00a2ring   \nevidence placed bcfor\u00e9 xif:.:\u00abi\u00ab:'1T1c  the su\ufb01: \ufb02ied\nby the \"tilat thii' plaintiff\nand dcfcnc:1a2i;.\"'1    :5' u1 \/'\u00e9rd share each in the\nsuit \"anti -'also oniarcd for enquiry for\ndetermifiair\u00e9on. v oVf*  Hence the dcfamiant no.1\nhaggkfdiac 111$:  \n\nflit  by the counsel for the appellant that the\n\n   to appmciatc hath oral and documentary\n\nevidcnr\ufb01r\/placed on record and came to a wrong conchzsion\n\n    decreed that suit It is argued that the \ufb01nding of\n\n \ufb01x:  court with regard to the execution of Will dated 02-\n\nVM  V.   1986 is incantct and illegal that the trial court ought to\n\nhave held that there is valid execution cf the said W11-H as\n\n' 5\n\n\u00a7 :1\n3\");-.--\u00bb-'__\"\"_,-*'\n \\\n\n\n\nthere is no in\ufb01nnities in the same. It is t\ufb01\u00e9' _\n\ntriai court has not properly appn:ciatcd    V. \n\nDWs.2 and 3 attesting wimess    \n\ncontended that the trial 00:11\":   L.\n\ndacision mpartcc} in case of  M snigh   Chhcti\nand otlwr, reported in    it i\u00e9  that\nthe \ufb01ndings nccoxxied byV1g;1:'m_u\u00a7;s4i  justi\ufb01cd and is\n\ncontrary to t1;1~c\":*;#;_i}?icr:s:::;:  to the facts\n\nand =   for allcwving of the\nappcaiI\"~I)y\" ivdrfi\u00e9r of the trial court.\nIn'  contcn\ufb01ons the counsel for the\n   the follmving decisions:\n _,    BALA 3033 vs MANINDRA CHANDRA\n1  {AIR 1932 SC 133;\n  'V 'EHAMBHU NATH 55 OTHERS vs GOKAL CHAN!)\n\n85 OTHERS (AIR (39) 1952 PUNJAB 146\n\nVT  \" -~--TVhe Icarncd counsel for the appezllant has 3139 relied on the\n\ndecision of the Apex Court in RABINDRA NATH\n\nE\n,  _, :1-\n9\n\n\n\nMUKHERJEE \u00ab'35 ANOTHER vs PANCHANAN BANERJEE\n(DEAD) BY L.Rs 6:. OTHERS (AIR 1995 SC 1684)  it\nis held thus: ' I' ' Z\n\n\"Succession Act (39 of  :1-\nWill ---- suspicious cixcumaitances --- will  \nregistered - Sub-registrar  tI:1_aLt~!mi11  f\nhad been read over ts execumr. Who,'  \ndoing so, admittgd contents -{,vf.::u:t'  \"\nwitnesses to d::-(;z\"1J:g1c11t\"-'e3src1's:_ \n\nloses signi\ufb01cance. u \"\n\n3  \"V-S'u_ooes3$ic5nV A-V_c'tf(3E3' of 1925) 8.63 --\n511111;-'&_-e Su's;)icicu\u00e9\"\"cir\u00a2umstan\u00a2\u00a2s - active\n\n \"\"\"  .  \u00a7}%aye(i..by a \u00a2Ik33s\"'m}ation of one of the\n_  ix1?:_;:xcc;:1tion of Will --- may raise\ns'usf:;i{:ir_3i1~i,ti'aft)'5;ence of other circumstances\n\nu 4' on'   Shbw voluntary chaxacter of\n\n2 L \u00ab, documexitf . \n\nV  ii}. 01; the  hand it is argued by the counsels for\n\n  fhgr 1 1103.1 axici 2 that the defendant:\n\n  has failed to prove before the trial court valid\n\n cxccutigqii of WiH--Ex.D.5 and there are suspicious\n\n c\ufb01\ufb01\ufb01msmnms in executing the. said Will and th\ufb01 said\n\n  \ufb01uspicions am not cleared by the propoundcr of the W131 and\n\nthat the evidence of attcstors of the said Will who have been\n\nexamined brzfozt the trial court as D.Ws. 2 and 3 di\ufb01cm each\n\n\n\n_, .. -\u00bb\n6 ,...\n\n\n\nother and there: is among suspicion with     \n\nexecution of said' Will by late Mu;\ufb01sWa.maj3pa;:t\ufb0111\u00a7\u00ab'\ufb01i\u20ac\n\nplainti\ufb01' and defendant 110.1 and 2 tin: \u00e9agghtcrs; \n\nsand' Iate Muniswamappa  e;\u00a7ii:.3J;l;:  1.]  in \n\nthe suit schedule pmps:-.1f.tJ'.cs, \ufb02fzcre' \u00a35110  or\nineorrectacss in the    by the trial\ncourt: and hcncg prayed'   Appeal.\n\n11.   the records, the\npoint  is, Whether the order\nof tl1\u00e9;\u00a7v_   incorrect, perverse and\n\n4; \"12...  oiic late Mm\ufb01swamappa was the owncr\n\n 'c:'_i:'1':.:=+. \u00a7-{g\ufb01 gcheduxe properties and he died 01:: 13--o4~1935,\n\n   issue and he left behind him only the\n\n a11\u00a2T~dA\u00e9fcndants 1 and 2 who am his daughtcrs to\n\n  V\"*331cceez\u00a2iiv.1\u00a7:5 his estate. Though it is contended before the ma}\n\n   the plainti\ufb01 that the suit schedule pmpertics am\n\n   ancestral properties of late Muniswamappa, on the basis\n\n of the evidence placed bcfoxt it, the trial court held that the\n\n\/K'\n\n\n\nsuit schedule properties are the self acquired properties of\n\nlate: Mm\ufb01swamappa. The plainti\ufb01\"\/respondent No. 1\". ii:-_1j s.;:1ot<\/pre>\n
\ufb01led any cross\u00abobjec1:io:n 3116 also not raised  %<\/p>\n
with regard to thc said \ufb01nding recorded by. -. <\/p>\n
Tm trial Court after consider-ingj tht;_:A4(:i(\u00a7=ci;1;nd:u’\u00a7:1t\u00e9’.”;*&i:.t::’!V3ji\u00a3A!:. <\/p>\n
endorsement isstmd by  additigfnal  1  *’<\/p>\n
Coxzirsmissioner for 51133116  Ban of
\nsuit schedule pmpcrti\u00e9:s’*~jtcm;’AL’5,. Ex.vI’v_’)H~4 v — the sale<\/p>\n
deed   V3at\u00a7:.’. i\u00a76in;1iSw31i\u00a71appa in respect of suit
\nschediilc     .- the cem\ufb01cd’ copy of wxitten
\nstatemenf    Mtmiswamappa and others in<\/p>\n
O.vS\u00e9Hcv}.358\/1V\u00a7\u00a78*2.ag;;(1.\ufb011rthcr by relying on Ex.D~13 — no\ufb01cc<\/p>\n
\u00bb igg-3._1cd..Vby  __ 2″” defendant admitting the suit schedule<\/p>\n
  acquired properties of late Muniswamappa,<\/p>\n
   has come to tilt: conclusion that the suit<\/p>\n
V   schgzdiile properties are the self acquired prepcrtits of late<\/p>\n
 The \ufb01nding of the trial court in this regard<\/p>\n
”  “‘”I5.as been accepted by the parties as true and correct and<\/p>\n
thus I have no hesitation to hold that the suit schedule<\/p>\n
properties am the self acquired prspcrtics<\/p>\n
Muniswamappa. Of course, fu\ufb02zhcr, from  <\/p>\n
copy of sale decsi dated 21-5-1969   u <\/p>\n
Muniswamappa in favour of oigc  ‘Sii’n,daram;;i:i<\/p>\n
respect of suit schedule item’ 339.3 Aprg\ufb01cny, ,   T.<\/p>\n
has mm: to the conclusion   was
\nsold by late Munswam\u00a3i;5p.a   thus thc
\nsame was not availabhz    date of \ufb01ling of<\/p>\n
the suit. The    V  is proper and<\/p>\n
 anti   any interference. Thsrefore, the
\nonly qut\u00a7s’tig\u00a7n   Vmy consideration in this appeal<\/p>\n
is,…’\u00e9fR?1i1t:thcr tI1x2..V_aVr:1\u00e9\u00a7feI1:ciant No. l~\u00bbappclL:mt has successfully<\/p>\n
‘V  the trial Court the valid execution of the Will<\/p>\n
 dam:  and 2-4-1936 said to have been executed<\/p>\n
by”\u00ab.Iate;”‘M:{1f1is1vamappa, without living roam for any<\/p>\n
   suspi\ufb01irszi and whether the approach of the trial Court with<\/p>\n
A’  to appreciation of evidence in respect of the said WEI<\/p>\n
%    proper and eorrect?\n<\/p>\n
\/r .-\n<\/p>\n
‘ {E .,,
\n ,1, \/” ‘
\n(yr .. ‘<\/p>\n
Kg;,,\/;,.,<\/p>\n
13. The two Wills Exl)-5 6:. 6 dated 2-4~1986 and 6-<\/p>\n
12-1982 respcctiverly have been produced before <\/p>\n
Court by the defendant No. 1. Both the Wills are  <\/p>\n
been. executed by late Mtmiswamappa  _  <\/p>\n
Ex.\u00a3)~5, th\ufb01 Ex.D-6 — earlier Will   have  <\/p>\n
Admittedly, E1x.D–6 is a If(3g.i\u00a7tElg\\\u00a7\u00a31 ‘O13C i%:*’,_~.:.:;5.~.4.\u00a5-s’–~,i”.~.’=.*–..%<\/p>\n
umtgistcred. The dcf\u00a3tncian_t.1 — .a’pp:\u00a2:}ia.f};t  has ‘V<\/p>\n
made no aftzmpt  ~..13roveV””‘tb\u00e9:’:’ VIV:V3’x.._l3–6\u00bb,’ bf  a<\/p>\n
suggestion was put to   VAi.h;v\u00e9zi_V__hc is one of the<\/p>\n
a\ufb01cs\ufb01iag  will Ex.D–6 but the same has
\nbeen denied by  .:’:’_’Hc\u00a7wcver to prove Ex.D-S on which<\/p>\n
thc..\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7\u00e9tiandanf  I  appellant hcmixz, is heavily relying<\/p>\n
.A   examining himself as 1:>.w.1 also examined<\/p>\n
  saici Will at Ex.D~5 as D.Ws.2 8:. 3. No<\/p>\n
ddiibt ?J:3\u00e9’vE5.Ws.2 35 3 have deposed before 1111:: C-()Iii,I’t with<\/p>\n
R   mgHardVV”t;} the cxccu\ufb01cn of the Will, but the suspicious<\/p>\n
g\ufb01irc\ufb01mstanccs surrounding the ctxecu\ufb01on of the said will<\/p>\n
   @5365 not allow to only rely on those depositions of I).Ws.2 8:.<\/p>\n
3 to hold that the cxccutian of the Will at EXJ)-S has been<\/p>\n
sucocssfu\ufb02y proved. Mere examining the  ‘ .<\/p>\n
for proving gcmainencss of the tcstgtors  nz_\u00a7f’ ” ‘V<\/p>\n
automaticany establish the vamgty of \u00a353″  <\/p>\n
suspicious circumstances su\ufb01qundi\ufb01g \ufb01e C2′{\u20acC’i.\u00a7\ufb01Q;} of tI1e.  ><\/p>\n
Will are ruhid out. In the  zfg\ufb01cci   counsel
\nfer the plain\ufb01\ufb01 before’    case cf KALYAN
\nSINGH vs CHHOTI 8!. OTBERS 3%) wherein it<\/p>\n
is helci thus:\n<\/p>\n
 “j\u00e91’V’WiH;V”is c1:_1\u00e9'”6f the most solemn<\/p>\n
_ –doc:11m_\u00e911ts'<k\ufb01ewa -to law. The cxccutant
\n_ ' ._of' fhe\u00ab.VW\ufb02iv.\u00a2\u00a3–.m'n9t be ca\ufb02cd to deny the
\n exccutirsn' or explain the circumstances
\n 'wh:Lc_h it was executed. It is therefore,
\nes-smntjal ' that trustworthy and<\/p>\n
V  evidence should be
\n produced before the Court: to establish
\n 'gt\u00e9nlxinzncss and authenticity of the Will.
\nIt\ufb02xxiust be stated that the factum of
\n' -cz\u00e9tcution and validity of the Will cannot<\/p>\n
~ _ be determined merely by considexing the
\nevidence produced by the pmpoundcr. in
\nonier to judge the credibility of Wimesscs
\nand disengage the truth \ufb01nm falsehood
\nthe Caurt is not confined only to their
\ntestimony and demeanour. It would be
\nopen to the court to consider
\ncircumstances brought out in the evidence
\nor which appear from the nature and
\ncontents of the documents itseI:f. It would
\nbe also open to th\ufb02 court to look into<\/p>\n
surrotlnding circumsfanccs as<\/p>\n
AW'-3.11' <\/p>\n
inherent ixnprobabilitjm. .01' the V\u00e9a\u00e9c to "   A'<\/p>\n
reach a proper coaciuzsion on \u00ab.tI:i'c_: 1\u20ac}fa'tu;t':. of '<\/p>\n
the evidence adduced by  " _ V A ~  <\/p>\n
14. From the perusal of above   clear<\/p>\n
that the evidence addvxxcgf\/d the $1.28 to be
\nconsidered taking   surmunding
\nchtumstancc\ufb01    case. In the
\ninstant case,”    Will has ilajlm to remove
\nthe  the execution of
\nthe  th:’:1eV o\ufb01\u00e9zrcad by the tcstator as to
\nwhy no \ufb01ha\ufb01tor  given to his elder daughter 113.,<\/p>\n
the,   tht: tcstator has not assigned any<\/p>\n
   t1\u00a7 e~\u00ab,c\u00a7xccu\ufb01on of the second will — Ex,D~–5 data!<\/p>\n
“2+4;.;\u00a7s5i””+m;\u00a2\u00a7;”1ic had already cxacutcd Ex,D-6 mgistcred<\/p>\n
WiI}I”‘–dat\u00a7d 612-1932 and also the tcstator of the Will had<\/p>\n
 Jfe:=i1\u00ab%:\u00a71  register the win dated 2-4-1935, Late<\/p>\n
  Mtini\u00e9wamappa had rcgstercd his earlier Will. dated 5-}.2\u00ab<\/p>\n
  .~1\u00ab9\u00a782 but the second Will said to have been made by late<\/p>\n
V Muniswamappa by cancelling his earlier Will was not<\/p>\n
regstered. The earlier registered Will can be cancelled only<\/p>\n
by the subsmuent registered Wilt. No maso;:;\u00e9.. ‘weze<\/p>\n
assigned by the attesting witnesses to the A’-.<\/p>\n
\nEx.D-S as to why the same was not  V  .\u00a2 <\/p>\n
D.W.2 has deyposed before    <\/p>\n
qixestioned late Mzmiswamappa while    *’<\/p>\n
– Ex.D-5 as to why no share    tixc late
\nMuniswaznappa was ‘_ to -I to f)}W:2 that he<\/p>\n
had given   te’  but no attempt was
\nmade  by iietenvfia\ufb01\ufb01te\u00e9 herein to shew before<\/p>\n
the 1113′ I  properties given to piaini\ufb01f by<\/p>\n
 \u00a3ate7;i\\!Iv11i1iswaeiapp\u00a7},__&ti1e attesting witnesses to the Will \u00ab-<\/p>\n
A ex\u00bb.::)–5 explain before the trial Court as to Why the<\/p>\n
 teVe.’::a.:toxr”  had put two sigxamze 03:: the last page of<\/p>\n
 . Mirther, the signature found on Ex.D–5 8:. 6 does<\/p>\n
V   1:0: each other. Further more, according to D.W.2, late<\/p>\n
”  Ni\ufb01meswamappa died after four to \ufb01ve years a\ufb01er the<\/p>\n
  “execution of the Wiii and according to 13-.W.3 the testator<\/p>\n
died after four or \ufb01ve months after execution of the Will.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the evidence of D.W.2 65 3 the said attestors the<\/p>\n
Will — EX.D–5 creates doubt with regard to the case_.0fL=–1’*<\/p>\n
defendant that the Wi\ufb02 — Ex.D–5 was  <\/p>\n
The defendant No.1 has not made;  att_eiii’1)t.:” ”<\/p>\n
the scribe of the said Will. Se aisei\ufb02ne :\u00a7ae;\u00a5;1:i:i:.;:ief’ei1\u00a3i\u00e9i:\u00a7it._<\/p>\n
is a bene\ufb01ciary under the    <\/p>\n
father had not executed any  T_tl”1e {iefendant
\nNo. 12 who is the  ef  No.1 \u00ab- appellant
\nherein, who is also a benee\ufb01caaxj\u00e9 :\u00a3;1a”er %th”c_win, has faiim ti)<\/p>\n
appea:r__be.fereV  and depose in this rtzgard if the
\nWill hae  ‘   by late Muniswamappa in<\/p>\n
resgeci of euit ..ee\ufb01edek pmm\ufb01es. Admittedly the Will –<\/p>\n
    to have been executed just 1 1 days before the<\/p>\n
A   :’?a1f_11:.ie=..\u00e9*amappa who died on 134- 1986 wherein the<\/p>\n
Wm,  .15 have been executed on 22-4-1935; ail these<\/p>\n
 suspieieiis circumstances smmunding the execution of W131<\/p>\n
  -Ese\ufb01-5 creates doubt as to the genuineness ef the Win.<\/p>\n
   _,V_77{\u00a7’herefore, I do mat find any good grounds to interfere with<\/p>\n
\ufb01nding of the trial Court that Ex.D~S has not been proved.<\/p>\n
\/1:.\u00a7:?:;;;3,\u00bb–W<\/p>\n
, 1-\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
15. Thc defendant No.1–.-appellant further failed to<\/p>\n
prove Ex.D-6 the carliar rtzgstercd Will said to <\/p>\n
executed by late Muniswamappa, the valid   _<\/p>\n
Ex.D–6 has not been proved by the appcllax\u00e9fr;  31\u00a2: * V. <\/p>\n
trial court was right in holding    4?.s\u00a2:hy:d:7;\u00e9_1\u00e9<\/p>\n
pmpcrtics, except suit sc}71cdu.1\u00a7; ite1i1 N0.3 2,155  L.<\/p>\n
partition between appellant   2 hcrein
\nand further the ma  1~i\u00a7ht;5;V%’i\u00a7\u00ab;;k~iVV:%u2;at theg} am entitled
\nto 1\/314 sham each in     ‘<\/p>\n
 Tm.   is Well masoned and
\nPasse\ufb01 am ‘.1    {yr the ev*idc11cc placed before it.<\/p>\n
  angle, I do not find any good<\/p>\n
  :12}  with \ufb02it: judgment and deem: passed by<\/p>\n
 Ev’. ‘fhczrefom, this appeal is d1sms’ ‘ sad as dcvnid<\/p>\n
gr\ufb01nnts.’ ~ <\/p>\n
-2
\n.Tudg3<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Indramma W\/O Srinivasamurthy vs Sharadamma W\/O Narayanappa on 21 July, 2008 Author: K.Ramanna IN ‘mE HIGH COURT OF’ KARNA’i’\ufb01;KA AT BA_!\u00a7’G!\u00a7LC\u00a7_!_\u00a7\u00a7’$:_.V _ DATED THIS THE 218* my 0;? JU1..\u00a5,,.A2msAfj ._ 3 BEF0R\u00a3; %’ V THE HON’BLE MR.3I?_J4STi(3;E._I{“–RAMAi’\u00a7\u00a3?\u00a3.}$ Q” REGULAR FERST A\ufb01\ufb01\ufb01\u00e9ia. NO. zao\u00e9, BETWEEN: INDRAMMA ‘ W\/<3 SRiN1VASA.Sf%1U'RTHEf V : 50 YRS, […]<\/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-141753","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nIndramma W\/O Srinivasamurthy vs Sharadamma W\/O Narayanappa on 21 July, 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\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Indramma W\/O Srinivasamurthy vs Sharadamma W\/O Narayanappa on 21 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-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=\"2008-07-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-11-17T11:59:08+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=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Indramma W\\\/O Srinivasamurthy vs Sharadamma W\\\/O Narayanappa on 21 July, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-17T11:59:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1420,\"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\\\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008\",\"name\":\"Indramma W\\\/O Srinivasamurthy vs Sharadamma W\\\/O Narayanappa on 21 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-17T11:59:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Indramma W\\\/O Srinivasamurthy vs Sharadamma W\\\/O Narayanappa on 21 July, 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":"Indramma W\/O Srinivasamurthy vs Sharadamma W\/O Narayanappa on 21 July, 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\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Indramma W\/O Srinivasamurthy vs Sharadamma W\/O Narayanappa on 21 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-07-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-11-17T11:59:08+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":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Indramma W\/O Srinivasamurthy vs Sharadamma W\/O Narayanappa on 21 July, 2008","datePublished":"2008-07-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-17T11:59:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008"},"wordCount":1420,"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\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008","name":"Indramma W\/O Srinivasamurthy vs Sharadamma W\/O Narayanappa on 21 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-07-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-17T11:59:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indramma-wo-srinivasamurthy-vs-sharadamma-wo-narayanappa-on-21-july-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Indramma W\/O Srinivasamurthy vs Sharadamma W\/O Narayanappa on 21 July, 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\/141753","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=141753"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/141753\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=141753"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=141753"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=141753"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}