{"id":266450,"date":"2010-12-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-12-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010"},"modified":"2017-01-22T06:23:51","modified_gmt":"2017-01-22T00:53:51","slug":"padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010","title":{"rendered":"Padmanabha Shenoy vs Dr Premachandra Shenoy on 21 December, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Padmanabha Shenoy vs Dr Premachandra Shenoy on 21 December, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: V.G.Sabhahit & S.N.Satyanarayana<\/div>\n
- 1 -\nIN 'm1\u00ab: HI(}I~I C()'UR'I' or\" KARNATAKA AT i3A\u00a7\\I(}AL()RE\nI')A'1'I';I_)'.1'HiSTIIE Elm' if)!\\Y ()1? DECEMBER 2010\nPRl\"*3SI*3N'i'\n\n'['E-IF, nON'I3LI'\u00ab: MRJUSTICE v.G. SARI--IA}-u*j1'f' Q :' ffj   .. \/'\n\nAND \u00abV   \nTHE H()N'BLE M_R..;UsT1CE N. \n\nREGULAR FIRST AI>PEA1.,Nt\u00a7;'782:\/'19'9\u00a7\u00a7' A _ _\nC \/w REGULAR FJRSTAPPEAI, NO.78\u00a7gL1;9\u00bb99  '\n\nRFA NO 782 OF 1999\n\nBE} WEEN\n\n1.\n\n   \n\ns\/o LA'I'\u00a3.3_I:iR1SHNA'~S1-'-[_ENOY}\nAGE:49'YRS'7I:;. . ._ \nR\/0 PI}(}T. N\u00abGl..5c;,  _ -\nFLAT N0. 10;;' 2.11 1?L?(..).(_)\"F'. '\nKA1\\\u00a7J13E;_R'A_(:Q;OPEMTIVE HOUSING SOCIETY\nBHANIDUP EAST \" . \n\n_ -BOMBAY: 400 0778.   APPELLANT\n\n \"  _ (B3;  v.c.'G_.G0RA' \"1 \" A \"\" ' 'SWAMY, ADV]\n\n * i>'RI?:MA(:1RLAN:)12A S}-{ECN()Y\n\n53-V\/(3 LATE KRISIRINA SHENOY\nAGE:47 YRS\n\nV \" \"MANJU NAT:---1A (:1,I1NI<':\n\n K()N()I\u00bb--IADY\nMANGALORE ~575 008,\n\nWw\n\n\n\nfa)\n\nU1\n.\n<\/pre>\n
j-4.}<\/p>\n
RAMESH SEIIIENUY<\/p>\n
S\/O LATE KRIS}–{NA SIIENOY
\nA(}[+3:4() YRS<\/p>\n
R\/O KODANGO H()US}?)<\/p>\n
E-3.0 . KU LASHEKIL’-XR
\nMANGAL()RE–575 005.\n<\/p>\n
VIJAYA SHENOY   –\n<\/p>\n
s\/0 LATE KRIS}–{NA Sf—IENOY?\u00bb
\nAGE:38 YRS<\/p>\n
R\/O KODANGO H()[JSE2; _
\nP.0.KtJLAsm\u00ab:K1TIAR
\nMANGAL()R::\u00ab>~575 005<\/p>\n
SHAMBHAVI SHI~\u00a7iNQY _ _  _
\nwmow OF LATIE K-R1SH’NAi-,S.HEN’Q’Y’  _
\nAc.E:73YRs – V  1
\nR\/O KODANGO HC)’U’SFfL
\nKULASHEIEHAR  1 .  ‘V
\nMANGALOREV 7575 \u00ab<)05_. _.– 7- .\n<\/p>\n
YASHODAA’ B11I1+;A(;\u00ab.._’  ‘ ‘
\nW\/0 BT;B\\ALAI=;_R1s11NA RAG
\nA’GE:–5;3 YI'{:-sf”-., ‘   ‘ ‘
\nR\/0 K()DAN(3QVH”().U’SF3″\n<\/p>\n
P.() KU1AsH\u00a7:m~1AR <\/p>\n
_ N\u00a3AN(}A1.QE21i1s– 575 (305.\n<\/p>\n
 ”  _ RAB_HU<\/p>\n
WI 0 sE%’,.TIJmaAMA PRAEBHIJ<\/p>\n
V T_ “‘AQ41a;:50  R\/O \/\\.L\u00ab~25, K.R.E.C)
\n* QUARTTSRS, P.().SRINIVASANAGAR
\n SURATHKIXL, MA1\\:GALAir1L ST()RES<\/p>\n
SARALEBETTU
\nSI’HVAI’ADY, MANIPAL 576 1 I9<\/p>\n
U DU Pl TALUK, I’).K<\/p>\n
3. MALATIEI (3. I>ImI-IIIII
\nW\/O GOPAL PRAi3I_i[J. A(_;I’\u00ab::42 YRS,
\nR\/O ‘I*RIv1’\u00ab:I\\2I C().()I”. I—IQUSING SO(3\u00a3E’1’Y
\nN().’18. GANGA IU-\\JAJf PA’I”I-I
\nRAMVAGAL, ;DOMB[VlLI EAST
\nBOMBAY 421 201<\/p>\n
9″ VEENA SURESH PRABI–.1 U
\nW\/() SURESH PRAB}-{U
\nAGE:38 YRS _
\nR\/O GOWALANI NIVAS’ _   .  –\n<\/p>\n
I CROSS, TIIYAPANAI\u00bbIALI;A <\/p>\n
D \/0″‘K_RISHNIA S-.H’EI’3I.*E)Y<\/p>\n
I, _;’R\/0 K()I)’AN(;o HOUSE<\/p>\n
” A .  MAINCNILQREW575 005. .. RESPONI’)EN’iS<\/p>\n
 IB3%_Sir:”fiI3…I,.A\u00a7:wI:IARY’A, ADV FOR R1)<\/p>\n
‘1’=1 {1S*’RI\u00ab’A I\u00ab.*II.I U\/S. 96 R\/W. ()RDER XLI R 1 OF<\/p>\n
  cpc A(;;AINsT ‘I’HE JUI)(}MEN’I’ ANI) I)EC’REi\u20ac :71″. 8.7.99<\/p>\n
  t”ASSI\u00a3I\u00a7 IN ().S..N(). 200\/.<a<3 BY 'I'I~IE PRL. CIVIL J'[\u00a7D{}}.'<3,<\/p>\n
 _\u00a73R_.I5}N. AND CJM, MAN('3AL(.)RI'AI-ITLY IDECREEING<\/p>\n
  THEA sun’ FOR I>ARTI’I'()N, Si\u20acI’AREA’1’E POSSESSION AND
\n%   __Iv1I\u00ab:sNIa PR(.)FI’1’S.\n<\/p>\n
K\/–\n<\/p>\n
\\\/\\\/Er<\/p>\n
RFA NO 784 OF 1999
\nIEEETVVEIEN<\/p>\n
I. PREM CHANDRA SHI%IN()Y
\nS\/O.I..A’I’E KRISHNA SHENOY
\nAGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
\nMANJUNATE–I CLINIC, KONCHAI)Y<\/p>\n
MANGALORE W575 008.   \u00ab_ .7.._. A\u00a3>:51i;:,.i’_ANT <\/p>\n
[By sn : B.L. ACE-IARYA, ADV)
\nAND V 4′<\/p>\n
1. PADMANABHA SH–ENOY,~”‘
\nS\/O mm KIQISPIN;A”aSE*Ii$NOY’ ”\n<\/p>\n
ADULT, RESIDING A’1f’FI.’.A’I?’\u00bb1\u00a7Io.5\u20ac\u00bb   —
\nFLAT N010, IIIRD_E’LO()R,_ u   –\n<\/p>\n
KANJEERA Co~\u00abop\u00a3\u00ab:RAUV_E’HQIJsII~J(3~
\nSOCIETE’;   ”\n<\/p>\n
EAST__M1’E\\\/_IBAI’\u00a7– 4’G(;._Q”7\u00bb8.   ‘<\/p>\n
H,AM};<:SH1Ls1–;1EN(;y  —\n<\/p>\n
S \/0 . LATE’ \u00a3:\u00a3Us’I~IN’A. 51- 1 ENOY<\/p>\n
ADUII1′. R*:::31Dfj1NG’1gyE~&o1)ANGI\u00ab: HOUSE
\nP0s*’F:1<:U:,:s\u00a3'ii13r<;A1~1_
\n "\n<\/p>\n
!\\)<\/p>\n
 V.  , 3. C ‘K\/IJAy;A.. SH 1\u00a71\\z0″y’ ”\n<\/p>\n
 S\/O..I.A’l’-E KRISHNA SHENOY
\n~ _ ”  R.\/AT K()D.AN(}E HOUSES
\n._   PO’sf1=:..E\u00a71:.:;sraEKAR,<\/p>\n
 ‘MANG;AVLOREw5<\/p>\n
‘ V  4. SHAMBAW SHENOY<\/p>\n
wizmw OF KRISHNA SI–IENOY<\/p>\n
” _ V “AI)1II.’1’, R\/AT K()DAN{_}E<3 I~I()USE,<\/p>\n
" KU'LASI':!EK}*-{AR,
\nMANCEALORE 575 005<\/p>\n
"W:\n<\/p>\n
\n
YASIEIODA E3 RAD<\/p>\n
W\/O SR1 B I::3A.LA’K1-{IS}-{NA RAO<\/p>\n
AI)UL’l.”, RESIDING AT K()I.)ANGE HOUSE
\nKU’I_.SI–IEKARA,<\/p>\n
MANGALORE 575 005<\/p>\n
GULABI sE1’\u00ab:’mARAMA PRABI-TU
\nW\/O SEETHARAMA 1>RA131~1U. ADULT,
\nR\/AT A125, K.R.E.C.STAI~’F  V’ = ‘
\nPOST SRINIVASANAGARA, SLImymKA\u00abI, -1’
\n_MANGALORE TALUK. ‘  .\n<\/p>\n
LAXMI G0I>ALAKR1_sHNA1>.ATI1,  V
\nW\/O GOPALAKRISHNA P;a..r:*1~L, ADU1..T
\nR\/OF PATIL STORES, SARALAB.fj3Ti.U;’  ‘
\nSHIVAPADY, MANLPAL 5?’6″ 1.119,
\nUDUPITALUK. ‘  T    <\/p>\n
MALA’1’HIG,PRABI}U’  ._   ”\n<\/p>\n
w\/0 SHR1 Gui)!->A1,;.’ 1>RA1’~3%.1+1LI;’\u00abAI)’LIL”1: ‘
\nR\/AT TRIVENE ‘ C01. 01? H’OUSIN”G”S()CII\u00a7IY,
\nN(). 18,4’GANGA’. I21\u00bb;-.jA;I”I-PA’fIi;–\u00ab’RAMVAGAL
\nDOMB1VE.LL_I    <\/p>\n
MUMBA: V4 2 if -53:01, 7′  h <\/p>\n
VEENA ::IJf{\u00a3._SH  pR}L_.z3I–{I}<\/p>\n
W\/0 sURI+;sH’–PRAB’HU, ADULT,
\n,, .j R\/AT G0’VA_LANI ;~JI\\\/As, I CROSS\n<\/p>\n
– “1*L:yApANA1–1ALL1; 4TH I BLOCK,<\/p>\n
JAYANAGAR,<\/p>\n
“’13Az3{(;ALQR.E 560 041<\/p>\n
‘  R9331?–1}:  RAO
\n wxo SADASITIIVA mo, ADULT,<\/p>\n
R\/Q1: NO. .1. 10\/79,
\nBALAI NIVAS, 11 MAIN,<\/p>\n
n ‘T ” ~..CI–iAMARAJPE’I’,<\/p>\n
.. ‘I%3AN(}AL()R.E 560 O .18<\/p>\n
-5-<\/span><\/p>\n
:1. 91.131–11>\/x EN NAIK
\n1:)\/0 IATE KRISHNA SI;1E.NOY’
\nABULT, R\/AT KODANGPZ 1\u00ab1c)Usi:\u00ab:\n<\/p>\n
POS’i’:KULSI*lEKAR\/\\,
\nMANGALORE 575 005 .. RESPQF\u20acDEN’~I’S<\/p>\n
(By Sri 2 C.(}.C:OPALASVVAM’Y, ADV FOR R1]<\/p>\n
T1-{IS RFA FILEI.) IS U”\/S. 9e:13,..()\u00bbF CF’_C “A(\u00a7A1.1\u00a7ST’* Tj{‘1~’~EE ” ”<\/p>\n
JUDGMENT AND 1)E(:REE m”.8.j’z.99″ms-$125) –  .Qv,VS;I\\j0’;\u00ab
\n200\/96 BY THE PRL. CIVIL .J1JII)GE\u00a7”E~:12.D;N;’*_z&2JDfEJEi1;<\/p>\n
BANGALORE, DEC1’aE1a1NG,_THE\\sU1T TPART-L?
\nPARTITION, SEPARATE ‘E()E5Ess’1-0151 . _ ANI’; ‘  ~M}:*3SNE” V<\/p>\n
PROFITS.\n<\/p>\n
THESE  I~1z\u00a3\\’ri1\\i(3i.. BEEN  AND<\/p>\n
RESERVED FOR JUDG”ME1′-J’1’~,_ _’Ii\u00a34i’:1S  SATYANARAYANA
\nJ., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWIN_G:f  ‘  <\/p>\n
E <Ii;Q\u00a7Mi:NT V
\niifherse  "\ufb01led by 1st d\u20acf\u20acfl{1.':H1t and
\nplaintiff E; 0s_N'a_.\u00a32<\u00a7<;\u00bb;}"s;.s3'(3. 'If'he said suit. was fiied. by<\/p>\n
p1aj1_\u00a7iii'I'fEADr.1Pr\u00e9m;iEhari=:1.ra Shenoy for the relief of partition<\/p>\n
 by_\u00bbn;\u20ac:t\u00e9S\u00a2 L!I'i(\u00a7.. bounds, for separate possession of plaintiffs<\/p>\n
share azi\u20ac'i.VvVf<)ri'Vv'tEie relief of mesne pro\ufb01ts and consequential<\/p>\n
ber1s:fit.,.__~";i'i*-IE" Asaid suit came to be allowed partially by<\/p>\n
 :"'jAAz.1gign1.ev:;t": aucl clecree-2 dated 8.? .1 995'). The plainti\ufb02' being<\/p>\n
' -..22\u00a3"ggri\u00e9ve(1 by rejecztioii Oi' portion of his prayer has come up in<\/p>\n
 _,v_\u00a3.':3[)\u00a7)(,'23.i agziirast the same in RFA.N0.784\/1.999. The 1st<\/p>\n
%.,<\u00a7_':'z,*'%<\/p>\n
-7-<\/span><\/p>\n
(leferidarlt, in the saiti suit being ag\u00a7grieve(1 by the partial
\ntlecree gratiteci in {‘av0u..r of plaintiff has ehalleiiged the same<\/p>\n
in RFA.No.782\/ I999. I”30th appeais are taken i41;_3i.t_t)get.1%1er<\/p>\n
for consideration since they arise out of troiriirionjtitigrtierit;___ .\n<\/p>\n
2. The parties to both appeais being (t(.V)’f_i1″I”i~3.V(.)I’1~,;A_Tft’.)’a”1?t)iC1_ <\/p>\n
confusion in their ide1’1tifieatioi1 with ,refe;er1(_:e’it0._eaeh_ef<\/p>\n
appeal they are referred to by t.i1eir.. r(‘;\u00ab.{iI)ectixkeiA  <\/p>\n
original suit for the sake of tt()11i’\u00bbreiiien(:e.\n<\/p>\n
3. Brief facts lc:ai:i:i’rig t0_\u00abth1’sAap.pea;Lare as iiritier:<\/p>\n
{ta}  :V\u20ac<it:feIgi'(v\u00a3'%'1r11..s -'1 to 3 are sons of Krishna
\nshenoy} git}; defei1tiarit'i1is widow and defendants 5 to 11<\/p>\n
are his dai'ighters.  contention of plaintiff is that<\/p>\n
  ;)1ai.ri'ti\u00a3f;.tle1endarits""i to 3 aiong with their father Krishna<\/p>\n
 Sh:_c5VI'i0f:5:\/V"'..'V'(T('iVfiS%fit1lt\u20ac(i _]'0int .Hir1du. famiiy governed by<\/p>\n
Mitakshai'a':.V_iaw of I_nh.e1fitar1ce and Succession. Krishna<\/p>\n
 Sheneyi kartha of his joint family acquired suit B and C<\/p>\n
 sttheziule properties uritier registereti sale deed dated<\/p>\n
 V'1;2.7. 1.964 vide d()eurne.ni. N0.tO55\/ \u00a3964 registered in his<\/p>\n
aw;\n<\/p>\n
\n
name. Thereafter in the year .1971 there was partial
\npartition in the family wherein each of the sons, nameiy,<\/p>\n
plaintiff, defendants 1 to 3 were given few items’~.o’f~._j’o.int<\/p>\n
family properties to their share. The said partially <\/p>\n
was reduced into writing as fanailyymigararl’tlatoti ”<\/p>\n
and confirmed in judgment and ciegccree ‘slated’  E382<\/p>\n
passed in OS.No.522\/1982*’ on the-,_ <\/p>\n
Munsiff of Mangalore.\n<\/p>\n
{b} Since said partition v.p1ai_’_tition the family<\/p>\n
continued to joint.  resfigtot of other properties<\/p>\n
mentioned   to the piaint. Subsequently,
\nhe came to knoxy”i.hat”‘hi’swfather entered into partition on<\/p>\n
28.’35.1_V984,\ufb02where1n he gate an extent of 25 cents of land to<\/p>\n
each’ of-r,hisy.daugh’t’ers, defendants 5 to E1. According to<\/p>\n
  1’ilai1;tiii2 rats 5 to 1} have no right in the joint family<\/p>\n
profierties;-ssilnthey were married prior to Hindu Succession<\/p>\n
 (Karns.tai:xa Amendment Act<\/a>) coming into force. Therefore,<\/p>\n
 f.;he'”‘said docunient is invaiiri and inoperative as partition.<\/p>\n
Egny disposition made therein is only gift. Since the<\/p>\n
‘Ni<\/p>\n
properties (lezilt under the said cioeiiment ciat.e<'i 28.i_\u00a7.'lS384<\/p>\n
(ire joint. f:Eii"ri.i]y pI'O1)(']'U('.'.S, his fE1.l'.hCI'  Kartha 0f'_joir1t.<\/p>\n
f\u00e9ililily 11:11.1 no riglit; to ggive away the satiric. '_l'1:'1(2rc\u00e9'i'oif'e, the <\/p>\n
same is required to be ig.i.1()I'(?C1. V  p —  , _ .
\n(C) it is his case that his father' tlieil ir1t,est:;2.t2_ on or<\/p>\n
about 19.2.1989. Aceor(1iI,1g tovhifn, suitf sehe(1'uler.<\/p>\n
properties are joint family fifiipeifties an.r_1 suit C schedule<\/p>\n
properties are his f21U'lv('.:'I"S_ iritiiviftiixgil pf'ro\ufb02per't.iesfas'Vf1)er decree
\ndated 5.8.1982 in <)s.No.5.22\/-:2982.__._ iltfAis,fz1l_s() his case that<\/p>\n
his father had.~1\/ 3"}?-11 sitizire  stiit 1:32 scliedule properties at<\/p>\n
the time of _liis'.tle;ith. Vsanie shouid devolve equally upon
\nplaintiff anti ptlefentl-:i11t:s"aiiitier the provisions of Sections 8<\/a> to<\/p>\n
10<\/a> ()f..HlI1(1ii ysfucseession\u00e9:\/Xct. He is also entitled to 1\/ 12″‘<\/p>\n
 share if’i’ASl’)1i,.t C schedule properties. Since plaintiff does not<\/p>\n
  iiesire_fIio,C’oi’rt.ifii1(: with defenclants he sought for severance<\/p>\n
to by \ufb01iing the aforesaitl suit. He also claim that<\/p>\n
 he  e1i1_.tiI.led to fE1tl..iI’E,’ profits in suit B aml C selieciule<\/p>\n
 p1fop_erties from the (.12.it:e ofsuit ixiil date of his share.<\/p>\n
zfbms
\n\u00ab<\/p>\n
..I{)..\n<\/p>\n
4. To the said suit 4111 defendant, mother of plaintiff,<\/p>\n
(lefer1d.ar1ts l to 3 and 5 to II filed cletailetl _written<\/p>\n
stateriient, whereiri she denied each and every ave~.’1’n’i’eIi’l:.V of<\/p>\n
plairit except the relationship between <\/p>\n
defendants and acquisition of suit _sehe_dule’ ;V)’ro’pefrties  h-gjr V’<\/p>\n
husband, Krishna Shenoy under itegisiteredlii<\/p>\n
12.7.1964. According to  Sheinoy?.:.d–:.;ring <\/p>\n
lifetime had sold about: 60 _ lafl(l’  by him
\nunder two different saA1r.\u00a7..V:i;l(-:A(:;AtVls?; the 1965 and 1966.
\nSubsequently ir1__197}.   differences arose
\nbetween th_ei_:  of }:\u00a3enee with the
\n    wishers of the family said
\n(ii-fference\u00a3s”viiere__settleri~reeiilung in effecting partition and<\/p>\n
recording the same 7111 family karar arrangement dated<\/p>\n
  1.9″L”?’1.”l*’.I”l1e sarrie” in full and \ufb01rial settlement of the<\/p>\n
  e_la_.irn Varzrl ~ riv.a.l_j..elairr1s of all the family members. Wherein<\/p>\n
ib:,_1_r sovris'”of’:Krishr1a Shenoy were allotted with separate<\/p>\n
 shares, Aiirishna Slienoy was also allotted with one share.<\/p>\n
 The”j.rer1’iaining properties were allotted. to tlaughters and<\/p>\n
lcirishna Shenoy. Aeeorcling to her, plaintiff is a party to said<\/p>\n
“\\,\u20ac_,~*\u00a7<\/p>\n
-1.}-\n<\/p>\n
family karar arlci has a(‘tc.rc;’)t.e(‘I. the same \\vi.th()t.:t clemul’. O11
\n2-xilotrrlerlt of sepa.I.’at(‘ sE’Iarc-.>s to ])1a.iI1t,ii’f, (“left-2r1(1aI1t.s _.._l to 3<\/p>\n
and their father zmd deferlcizmts 5 to 8, piaintiii7._ amt<\/p>\n
defendants 1 to 3 came to be separateci i”1’0_t1′;–. th\u00e9”farni\u00a7y.,’ ~<\/p>\n
there was division in status and Jpr<)perti_ss'Vbyfm\u00e9tesAeuadtiV'<\/p>\n
bounds.\n<\/p>\n
(a) In the said t1iViS.iOIt:tiI{‘g,:.  t\ufb01iezlts was
\naiiotted to plaintiff i.(~’,.V,  in Sy.No.25’7\/2
\nand 7 cents in    aiiotteri 43
\ncents in   aiiotted 43 cents
\nin    atlotted 43 cents in
\n ‘bf 25 cents was aiiotteci to late<\/p>\n
Krishna  ‘in.v”Sy.\u00a7’Ns:;258\/4. In addition to that, he was<\/p>\n
it  alsoiig\ufb01fen “11nc1ivici\u00e9d'”\ufb01gE1t. with daughters in the r\u00e9maining<\/p>\n
   t”i:1_d_\u00a7:r the said family karar”, it was agrceci that<\/p>\n
E'(;’:I\u00a7’l.VE’1il’1ivI1g):’fi’i1)Zk)\u20ac’fI’Tii(i’S shalt be hc>Idj0i11tly by Krishna Shenoy<\/p>\n
 and his A’? (izuightrrrs, zmxnely, tic-fericiants 5 to .1 it’ According<\/p>\n
 to  defendant, ineluciing pIair1t.iff all her sons got separate<\/p>\n
‘\u00ab\/gag<\/p>\n
-12-<\/span><\/p>\n
share, which was aeeepiecl by each of them and recorded in<\/p>\n
the said family karar.\n<\/p>\n
(b) It is further statecl by her that in _<\/p>\n
there was misu.n(.le.rstan<iir1g in eonneetiori.wiih"~tlie,:ri\u00abght_to <\/p>\n
use common path reserved 1}inder_ jthe_ .'farnily"-.il<arar.<\/p>\n
'Therefore, Krishna Shenoy  plaintiff  " ,<\/p>\n
and 3 as plaintiffs 2 and 3  for 'declaration
\nand injunction against: 'p.1_ain_t'iff  .defen(lan"i herein as
\ndefendants I and 2 in the   suit was filed in<\/p>\n
the Court of ;II"A_dditio_I1z1l ?3iri1.ii1si'ff–,:_"'Mangalore, D.K., which<\/p>\n
Carnegie  uper _*judgment and decree dated
\n5.8.1982: 'in tiiefsaidbst_.aif;"1:he family karar dated 10.8.1971<\/p>\n
was ilplield title" eo'eii'i\u00a7: The plaintiff beirxg a party to the<\/p>\n
V'  saidastiiii  fuilyfaware of the judgment and decree passed<\/p>\n
 _ tl1ei'ein"'\u00aband"toheiysaine has become final, wherein the right of<\/p>\n
way reserv\u00e9eii under the said family karar was also<\/p>\n
 con\ufb01rmed. Therefore, the same is binding on plaintiff and<\/p>\n
 " otieiegr parties.\n<\/p>\n
\n
-13..\n<\/p>\n
[(1) it is also I”l(:’I’ Case that Krishiia Shozloy wh.ilc he was
\nalive in sound ami (iisposizig state 01′ mind iiaci exc(_:u_t(>d 21<\/p>\n
Will datc.d 7.6. 1982, b\u20ac;'(1li(32:1U’1iI’1g 25 cents of land e:Iidf.’t{:ti* _in<\/p>\n
his favour i.m(iei- family karar in favour of 5.11} (1\u20acf1vV_t?’.’T:’l”(i-‘rll.f.i’f’-,, *<\/p>\n
namely Yashoda B.B.Ra0, which is…register.\u00e9”tlV’ ‘a~.<3{ .r_1'ly% : .!(:l'(3’f_(V'{Ii'(:1′:1{}t.s 5 to 11 were
\nalloited with 25 cents…   land was
\nallotted to  A%>;ii%i”p23izi’titi0r1 is valid and
\na.11()tI’l”;\u00a3(%l!t’,V ().”f  to 1 1 is justi\ufb01ed, as said
\npr0per’iies__ wei(~i  in favour of Krishna Shenoy<\/p>\n
and,hi.s dau\u00a7;h_iers vunfi-er Tfamily Kara in the year 1971.<\/p>\n
   aIi(_?g\u00a3i1′.i.Qi’.1 of d.aughi.ers having 110 right in suit<\/p>\n
‘ I3″;:;r1(i\u00bbC”s(:’}i’1ed:”.;1e pr0pei’t:ies and shares given to daughters<\/p>\n
atI1()=1iI}tS 33- gift were ail denied  false-.. It was also<\/p>\n
(:o.n.ie.r1(i\u20ac:’;(il that right. of (lz;u1g11t.(=.rs in the present case springs<\/p>\n
  (3u’\u00e9—._.(&)f f\u00e9irnily ka1’ar of 1.971, which is \u20acl1′}’iV(:'(i at in full and<\/p>\n
E4″.-*\/’k’v%<\/p>\n
-14-<\/span><\/p>\n
final settlenient of clisputes of family members and which is
\nalso confirmed in (_)S.iNo.522\/ 1982. It is also the ease of 4th
\nclefeiiclant. that subseq1,1ei11.}y there were proceedings initiated<\/p>\n
by Urban Land Ceiling Authority, wl1(‘reir1 the p21I’ti_4r:>sV_lto_fs.11it<\/p>\n
had representeti and shown to said authorit;i_Wthe.l_’ V’fa2I’11~3′.\u00a7)5′ .<\/p>\n
karar.\n<\/p>\n
(e) It is also her case thatv~p’l’ai-n.tiffaoeepted<\/p>\n
share given to him u1’1(iE’I’ fa1nj1y”i\u00abkai=iar;’l isfesitopgzed_l:’iro’rn_<\/p>\n
contending to the contra.  ti’ie_’brotiiersfViiieliiding’VV<\/p>\n
plaintiff had consented for allottingvsharta to tl’1e.Ada1ighters at<\/p>\n
the tizne o_flA’eln_t.e_ri.i31.g i.rjite.’__1’a:.nily karar. Tire contention of
\npiaintifflregardingfianlily’ (fated 10.8. 1971 being partial<\/p>\n
partition infrfzespeaclt of few items of joint family properties<\/p>\n
we1*e{‘de”n.ie’d., Denialmof rights to defendants 5 to 11 and<\/p>\n
   under partition dated 28.3.1984 and the<\/p>\n
(:ontentionl”$tliat Krishna Shenoy died intestate was also<\/p>\n
 denie(‘i,V it was speei\ufb01ea,l1y pleaded that after the partition in<\/p>\n
  there  no llintlu Ur1divid(‘d joim: family status,<\/p>\n
f$:.fi.SI’lI’12;l Shenoy was not tile Kartha and plaintiff and<\/p>\n
– ’15 ..\n<\/p>\n
(.1efen(.iz1.r’1.ts i to 3 were not the. rueiriibers ()f_j0i:1t. family. On<\/p>\n
the z1t’01’esa,i(:i grotmds she sought for rejection of the plaiut.<\/p>\n
5. Ifiased on the aforesaid pleadings initially on
\n17.8.1998 the court below proeeetled to fralne the,<\/p>\n
iSSIl\u20acS.’<\/p>\n
ijwhether the plaintiff provesthzlt, tite
\ntook place between himself, tieie;r1(lztnt’ii.Ny0:illtol
\nand their father late KfE’ShI1a. She\ufb01oy ineV.ti*ie..  3
\n19′? 1 con\ufb01rmed by the d’eefee  it
\nOS.N0.522 \/ 1982 Jen theV..filevvQi’ ll Adcleitieo\ufb01nal<\/p>\n
Munsiff of Mangaltif\u00e9a _is’\u00ab__a p_a1tia.l <\/p>\n
 further proves that the
\nI)ziititiot1 deed’ e_>{eet1’tJc:(1 by his father dated
\nV.23.8.’ij9s’4 V1.21.’-fairotiifs of defenclant No.5 to 11 is<\/p>\n
 ricit hVi.x1di1’i\u00a7;”‘ C1.’_1_._t’he plaintiff’?<\/p>\n
   plaintiff further proves that after
\n the tltjealtli of Krishna Shenoy his 1\/ 5th interest
\n infltlig-:'”;B schedule properties devolved upon the<\/p>\n
\ufb01lgtintiff and cleie11(.1ant.s equally’?<\/p>\n
-15-<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
4)Whether the (iefe1e1(.1z1r1ts prove that the<\/p>\n
partition took place d11riie1g_; 1237.1 is 21 \ufb01nal<\/p>\n
partition as such the plaintiff has no right <\/p>\n
seek partition once agaiii?\n<\/p>\n
5)Whether the (.1efe1’1(.izmts further pro_\\(e\u00bbt’i:ai.’ <\/p>\n
late Krishna Shenoy hacl eygeeizteci all  <\/p>\n
7.6.1982 w.}:1ere 1.1nder tile:25j_”i:~evnt\u00a7._Of<\/p>\n
allotted in his favour urlder the fafnily iwas <\/p>\n
bequeathed in favour o\u00a3\u00a7?’asi1c)da”\n<\/p>\n
5th defendant’?  . l A’ I<\/p>\n
6)”\/hether the (iei’en(i::11it:s’:frjirt;h.et’fp{oV_:e that the<\/p>\n
s1.1bseq1ie::1Vt 11_)d\u00a7tii,i\u00a35:1~’} :1\u00a7e{i–.,__(-iatm’ 28.3.1984<\/p>\n
l’:e:t\u00ab-‘.irg\u00e91*i_Iat’e;.Krt’s.t111_a S”11e:1.ey and (Iefendants 5<\/p>\n
to 1′ .1– ievvaligl’?aS<vt.:3't)ii1_taine(l in para No.9 of the<\/p>\n
W1'i tten sta,tei'1'i'er1t's'._\u00a2_ 3 " 2 <\/p>\n
. — .7)Whether't.lIe clefeficiarits further prove that late<\/p>\n
 Krishria  has executed a last Will on<\/p>\n
 bequeathed the properties held by<\/p>\n
  wife — !She.mbaVi, the 4th cilefendarlt<\/p>\n
V a1j(1.(i:.(3f(\u00e9I1(lz1I1{.S 1 to 3'?\n<\/p>\n
“8)_Wi1e1:her the 1′)iaii1t,1*\ufb01’ proves that stitl the<\/p>\n
it  plaint I3 and C sehetluit-2 properties are the joint.<\/p>\n
A’ family propert’.ieS oi’pEz;1.i.r:t.ifi’ and tiefendants’?<\/p>\n
-17-<\/span><\/p>\n
Qjwhether the plaintiff c-.’.n.titIe(i for [)aI’tiT;i()I1 ar1(l___
\nseparate possessiorx’? if so, what. is \u00a3119 qt12u1tuxr’n_ <\/p>\n
of share’?\n<\/p>\n
1())What order’? or decree’?\n<\/p>\n
‘I’herea\ufb01,er on 3.1.3. “1999 the f”011()wif1g \u00bb2’1’,(1″d.vit’i0r:ai-.i.ss-L.g@.$”\\i{erE:*
\nframed.\n<\/p>\n
ljwhether the tleflarxciaifit, pr–Q_\\Vr(-}’s
\nfather Krishna Shcnoy  .(Exetf’t;1te(l 1a”stvx.2s\/i.1.1’anc1
\nbequeathed Sy.N(},3’5’~’2′._IHi\u00a7aSiI{i}3,\u00a7”Obf56 Cents in<\/p>\n
extent of B scherdgl\u00e9 1’1V:iS..\\f:’:lVOI,II’ and<\/p>\n
ass”‘s!.1{$I’1. h\u00e9’:::;j.s;. tin; ‘-exciiisixrszowrzer for the said\n<\/p>\n
2)Wh..(jtherV}1.&\\ \ufb0111″‘t1’.1_”3<\/p>\n
-13-<\/span><\/p>\n
(lefentlzirit, namely (flulabi Seetlriaramaprabhu was exarriiried
\nas DW. lo and in support. of their case they pI'(}(11\u00a3(‘.f3(lw\u00a7\ufb02,\u00a7.ill.v 6<\/p>\n
(lo(:ur:1ents and got tliem r.r1a.rke(‘l as l+3xs.i) ‘1 to I36.  Cf.” .l l”<\/p>\n
7. On appreciation of tile ::’pleadlin_gls._,  or-ak.oo.___AaIa;t.l<\/p>\n
documentary evidence 21vaiiabie_or1 recorri ti1,ve'”o<3v2.irt bolow_*<\/p>\n
proceeded to answer issue  between
\nplaintiff and clefenclaritshi.   Slienoy in the
\nyear 1971 lf)\u20aciI1g,'(3OI1\ufb01I'vI'I.l.F?.(.\u00a3'iii  passed
\nin os.No.5212:fiaeaix;Elle_;1itn\u00a5fna'ti~{;e;–mend issue regarding
\nbinding of   2\u20acl.3.l984 executed by
\nKrishrlial  defe1'1(:lar1ts 5 to 11 in
\naf\ufb01rInatnre."  claim of plaintiff for 1 \/5th<\/p>\n
share in B s'cm\u00a7d:;1\u00a7a properties was partly held in af\ufb01rtnative.<\/p>\n
.  – -\u00e9\u00a3tI'i—issue which wasufrarned against. defendants wherein they<\/p>\n
 Werel  \u00a5Vi[)or'i to prove that the partition took place in the<\/p>\n
yearld 197}."il\u00e9;. 'final is held in negative. 5th issue regarding<\/p>\n
 exeeutiori of Will dated 7.6.1982 by Krishna Shenoy in<\/p>\n
resp'c:;t(':t. of 25 cents alloiiecl to his share in favour of 5th<\/p>\n
d\ufb01efezlolant was held in afi*irma.tive. 63th issue regarding<\/p>\n
xx-J';\n<\/p>\n
\n
-19..\n<\/p>\n
vaiidity of parti’t:io.n deed dat:ed 28.3.1984 between Krishna
\nShenoy and clefenciarits S to 11 heid in the negative. 7th
\nissue regarding exr::cut,ion of Will dated 18.4.1984 by Krishna<\/p>\n
Shenoy in favour of defendants 1 to 3 held in the affirirnative.<\/p>\n
8th issue regarding plaintiffs joint possession o:i”‘sufit.__E”5<\/p>\n
C schedule properties was held partly in   $3.4, <\/p>\n
as additional issue No.1 w11erein1;l)ur_der; was ‘castspvonl\ufb01rci<\/p>\n
defendant regarding Krish11a.Sher1oyAhequeathising E36 <\/p>\n
in Sy.]\\Eo.36n2 in B schedule propert:ies”.ir1″*h.is favour was
\nheld in affirmative. .”rviciiui)”‘:iai’ ~-i.ssVu”e._No.2 was held in<\/p>\n
negative. Consequently    10 the suit of<\/p>\n
plaintiff   The plaintiff being aggrieved by
\nthe said lj\u00ab-.idgrrie1itj~Vandlkieeree so far as it pertains to
\nrejecting \u00bb.prayer’._see5kir1g share in suit C Schedule
\nIiroperties was. filed RFA.No.’784\/1999. The 1.st<\/p>\n
 ‘- (iefer1(iEaT1’3t. being aggrieved by ti’1e_juc1gmen.t and. decree so far<\/p>\n
  pi.\/r.i.2’–” share to piaintiff in suit B schedule<\/p>\n
propertiesx\u00e9hallcangecl the same in RFA.No.782\/ 1999.<\/p>\n
-9.0-\n<\/p>\n
8. The groumls urg.r,e(.i by the 1st (ieferida1’1t in
\nI-{I?~’A.Ne.’?”82\/ 1999 are ti-12.11:. the ‘inciing on issue Nos. 1 ,  4, 6<\/p>\n
and 8 are not based on proper appreciation of fa::ts.._:1nci<\/p>\n
material on record. ‘Elie same is contrary tothe  ~<\/p>\n
(.)S.N0. 522\/ 1982, which (:0nfir1ned_ fanci upheiiei  .\\iali(li.ty or ”<\/p>\n
family karar of 1971. The \ufb01nding in  re\u00a7a:7d’ii.ig<\/p>\n
family arrangement being upi’1lei:1_V is bimling ()1i_ail.: theparties–. V *<\/p>\n
including plaintiff. The wife til-‘1(vl -.V(_iaught.–ers of Krishna
\nShenoy being not  t,0′._th\u00ab::\u00a2i saiVr_.i’V.siiit, the said decree
\ndoes not have uI_1iversal..applitxzttioifidg\u00e9s not alter the<\/p>\n
rights of  un(l.eif” th’e”i”amily arrangement.<\/p>\n
The \ufb01inding 1982 could not be pressed into
\nservicetq a.ffeCt\u00bb.VtI1e”rigi:1ts*6l’ the parties under the family<\/p>\n
arrangement. ._Tne7’sa1’\u00b0d suit being instituted and concluded<\/p>\n
V’  i&E1″v;;\u20acSf),\u00e91.1’3  8 (iziys””witl10i.1.t notifying the 1st defendant in<\/p>\n
  1:133 outcome of the same is not binding on the<\/p>\n
a[i;._i_>ell:1:1t\/Qilfstfldeferltlaiit. The “family arrangement. of 197′}<\/p>\n
 was e’0nI1plet’.e and total. Those of the properties which were<\/p>\n
 zriotlggiveri to the share of plaintiff and other ciefentiarits were<\/p>\n
a1l0t.te(i to Krishna Shenoy ant} his daughters who had. joint<\/p>\n
i\ufb02\ufb01w
\nE<\/p>\n
– 21 –\n<\/p>\n
rights of possession and enjoymeni.. Clause 4 of the
\nmemorandum of partitiozi dz:1,ted 10.8.1971 termed as__fa.mily<\/p>\n
karar discloses that ali the pro1.)ert.ies of the joint ‘f?lI’E].:i13-?_’Ii-E_1(1<\/p>\n
been partitionetl ie:-wing riothing for alieged joint  “of ~<\/p>\n
i’Lzt.ure partition.   _<\/p>\n
9. The conduct of the”-~.o[)arties es1)eeia}Ily*…_I\u00a7risi1r1a–.V’<\/p>\n
Shenoy made it clear that fa:\/11113?’ -arrangement wasficomplete
\nand total and had beer1._\u00e9{et.ed u;pori:{‘Is”pursuanee of such
\narrangement, a _iWi1I was-.e’xeei;ate(oi “I:S3r Kiiis\ufb01hna Shenoy on<\/p>\n
7.6.1982 bega\u00a7_ea;1~ii\u00a71gV;;;1 \u20aci_t.e.n1 \u00a7s\u00a3.p’1?5’perty which had faliera
\nto his1.s11areiAi’1\ufb01f_the :”i'”‘g1’IIi_i\u00a7\u00a7f””\u00a3\u00a7ii’I’21Ii\u00a7\u00a7\u20acIl’1\u20ac[1t, the partitioii effected
\non 28.E3A;’J.\u00a7)8\u00e9I5 is ‘jlroperty jointly held by Krishna<\/p>\n
Shenoy and”det’e;1(.iar1ts  to 11 as joint owners pursuant to<\/p>\n
 fz’1iniiy iktari\u00e9ir, there\u00a3’ift.er in respect of his share executed a<\/p>\n
  Wfili 984. The partition between Krishna Shenoy<\/p>\n
\u20ac{ii.(_T\u00a5’V'(1\u20ac{v”l3′.T’1′(i’\u00a2E*j..i1KV:tS 5 to It is binding on plaintiff aiso. The<\/p>\n
 allegation regarding Krishna She:\/my dying intestate or that<\/p>\n
 p1_21.iifi\u00abi’.iff having I \/5′” Sh\u00a3li'(‘. in suit {-3 sehetiule properties is<\/p>\n
v\u00a7rit;ho:.1t substar’iee. The \ufb01;21’11.ily arrar1gez.:1’1ent being complete<\/p>\n
4<\/span>
\n,…N_}”_<\/p>\n
-22-<\/span><\/p>\n
and total arid the pariii\ufb02ioii effeetecl in 1984 being division
\njoint owners of the properties, the properties which fellio the<\/p>\n
share of Krislina Shenoy therein was his personal .\u00abp”ro{2–ei’ties<\/p>\n
which he could dispose of without reference  <\/p>\n
Such disposition under the Will ..a(lrnitt\u00a7;-filth’to:’.’;vh\u00e9iv\u20ac:”‘Aheenu <\/p>\n
executed by him is binding on plair:;tiff.” ‘l’he ‘(leVoi’u:tiori?1.iof<\/p>\n
Krishna Shenoy’s pro[)erties’was by te’stainei1’far3i ‘S\u00ab!l.QCf\u00a7SSiOI1. V L’<\/p>\n
and the suit filed by him e_;if1ri()t–.t_\u00bbbe f)1’oceedel3:l without
\nseeking relief of sett.irig._ the;  dated 28.3.1984,
\nwithout challenging the..s.r.a:ji\u00a21ity5–.o13,w’i1’i cl\u00e9itetill 18.4. 1984.<\/p>\n
a_JlO.  in RFA.No.784\/1999 which
\nwas \ufb01ledowby   the denial of share in suit C<\/p>\n
schedule propeertiies is on the following grounds. The court<\/p>\n
V’  below ha.vii1g corneultodthe conclusion that piaintiff is entitled<\/p>\n
 ltio.  of suit I3 schedule properties erred in<\/p>\n
negatingliis. ‘eiaim in respect of C schedule properties. The<\/p>\n
 finciirig of the court below that plaintiff having not chosen to<\/p>\n
 questiori the Will, it is not open t.o him to eliallerige the same<\/p>\n
at this stage is illegal, as in the court below on issue No.5<\/p>\n
.\/Viv:\n<\/p>\n
E<\/p>\n
..23..\n<\/p>\n
the burden was on the (lefendants to prove that Krishna<\/p>\n
Sherioy had e;xeeuted a Will on ‘?’.6. 1982 and the Cl\u20acf\u20acI”1′(‘i8.I’ltS<\/p>\n
were required to prove the ggeiiiiirieric\u00e9ss of the saici”ii”‘–in<\/p>\n
aceorclaiiee with law. Si.r.1(:e they failed to prove”i;iieAs’aii1e  ~<\/p>\n
leading evidence through attestors_tti.e”court:”below dugiix to <\/p>\n
have rejecteci their claim base(‘l or; tire’iWil1}\u00bbThe’firidi:a,g”*to<\/p>\n
the contrary, is illegal and (;*_op\u00ab:J_Vse(l to settled_ 1i.ri;.:eipl.es of<\/p>\n
law. That the party who pro(l1,1lees-vliaxre to prove
\nclue execution, attest:a:t.i.e’r; A    genuineness.
\nMerely because plaintiff\u00bbr1it’1 j:r.io’t–.Vl_t’iie same is not a
\nground to       accordance with<\/p>\n
law.\n<\/p>\n
1 1..=Ti’he c0t:rt”?oel0w—-laaving regard to the averments in<\/p>\n
0874522\/#15382  oral evidence ought to have come to the<\/p>\n
‘ACQIl’\u20actll1\u00a7i:Of!.’th.at suit B schedule properties were ancestral<\/p>\n
pm’_pert-E.es._ofiirislina Sherioy. The finding is contrary and<\/p>\n
illegal,  share gI’E:lI’l’t,\u20acC] by court below to an extent of<\/p>\n
 Al ,1 121-” xiii suit. B se1ie(1.i1ie ;.>ro;.><_:rty is lesser than what he is<\/p>\n
'–.leni:i.f:rle(l t.o and the (:r1eli..isi()11 of the (:oui1: below that<\/p>\n
vv,<\/p>\n
3<\/span><\/p>\n
-24..\n<\/p>\n
Krishna Shenoy had only 1.\/12″” share in B schedule
\nproperties and not 1\/5th share, is incorrect. The \ufb01nding
\nthat defendants I to 11 are also entitled to equal sharein B<\/p>\n
schedule properties is illegal. The court below has_Wfaile.d”‘to<\/p>\n
appreciate that Krishna Shenoy did. not have absoleiiteiilllriightl ‘<\/p>\n
in the properties bequeathed 1mder.Wii.|_  it it<\/p>\n
court below having held that Will :’t.1at’.e_d .6:<\/p>\n
proved, plaintiff is entitled ‘to_v”‘1.\/12″i”~share  l'{j”‘vs.ehe(iule’w.l’<\/p>\n
properties also. The court b\u00a2l.Qlil\\’r~,h\u00e95c$v erred in  holding
\ndefendants 5 to 11 arelnot. ,eia.titledshare in the suit<\/p>\n
schedule properties.  Vapppreeliation  of oral and<\/p>\n
doeumentaify’lvlevidenceris-_v also not proper. There is no<\/p>\n
applicationof pri.;ieilp’Ees”‘iaw to the facts on hand.<\/p>\n
_ \u00a32. lfi.,th’eSe ‘vappea’is, this Court on appreciation of the<\/p>\n
   urgedir1’vthe\u00ab’appeals and the \ufb01nding of the court<\/p>\n
 V blelow “W}g7%i”l1’:l””~l’jC\u00e9i’\u20acI’e}’lC\u20ac to issue Nos.1 to 10 and additional<\/p>\n
eeee moi gee 2 framed therein hold that the following<\/p>\n
 points arise for consideration in these appeals:<\/p>\n
W”?\n<\/p>\n
\n
-25-<\/span><\/p>\n
1) Whether 2.110 I’i.1.’1di:1g given by the \u20ac’.()1.1I”t below
\nregarclirig partition midcz-21″ family karar dated._
\nl(‘).8..1.9’?l is Iyartial pzufiiiiiori, is just E3.v{xld__”!\ufb02.<\/p>\n
proper?\n<\/p>\n
2) Whether the findirig of_mtV.ib1e ooe’jm;– <\/p>\n
holding pamuon clatetl 28.3,19s%lT’a,s”\u00abin:&a1i\u00a71;’.:sV_p””‘__l]<\/p>\n
just and proper’?\n<\/p>\n
3) Whether the ‘\ufb01n(lirig\u00abl.:of the’
\nregarding beqiiesf; inagie  “‘E\u00a3rishna’vvSh.en()y
\nunder Will  “‘*ir;.a:fa\\(our of 5″‘
\ndefendant and  favour of<\/p>\n
his w1’fe_ ..ang._1 ‘s.o:1s, are _}fali(l”aijidubinding?<\/p>\n
*4) xzsrirlariie-.s\u00ab.;l%;mr\u00a2:aiig._of 1\/12111 share to plaintiff<\/p>\n
in’B sQli1e’r:1.iilo.jp:’op{;i’E:i-as, is just. and proper?<\/p>\n
* ‘E1 Wl1uetl’1Aef’i*ej\u00e9Cting the prayer of plaintiff for
\n shareppin s1iit”‘C”sc}1e(ii1Ie properties, is just and<\/p>\n
V’ ”  pro~;)e:j’?’* ._<\/p>\n
‘ }3.A.’J_?\u00a5._eaT3’\u20aci thc-2 (.’.0E.lI’1SC1 for appellants and respondents<\/p>\n
in both”*t,h(3; appeals, peifuseci the \u00a7_;;’o1.in(1s of appeals, Fimling<\/p>\n
 of below in _;’1,1(1gxI1{>r:.i. passed in ()S.2()O\/1996 and the<\/p>\n
 “ora1’an(i ciocumcntary evi(‘l(:z’1<:e therein. On reappreoiation of<\/p>\n
.,\\w<\/p>\n
-25-<\/span><\/p>\n
the saI1’1e this Court E1i’lSW(:’.1″ point .Nos..l., 2 and 4 in the
\nnegative and point Nos.3 and 5 in the E1f\ufb01I’I{1\u20ac-1t.i\\f_'{;’.~~,f(“;If’ 7:._he<\/p>\n
following reasons:\n<\/p>\n
14. The relationship 1)(3tW._v{3t?1′},”t’a1;h(a\u00ab*,zlsfifid<\/p>\n
defendants is not in disp1.1t,e.’ -._f1’he f’a.e1′.” that”siiit.__sc}1edt:1e_ <\/p>\n
properties were acquired   under
\nregistered sale deed    not  dispute. It
\nis further not in clisptitg-::”thatdavs  1971 plaintiff,
\ndefendants ‘1   formed members
\nof joint  that in the year 1971
\ndue  partition was effected
\nin the v’i’2;-inilyi  which was reduced into<\/p>\n
writing as  ti\u00a7’z1ra’r  10.8.1971. This is the doeunient<\/p>\n
 _ un\u00e9\u00e9r ‘}?\\”Ihi(\u00a7’i’1’t1″I(?  of the parties wiil have to be decided<\/p>\n
as,itrhas_h(:o1ne’:,inl.o place at an undisputed point of time<\/p>\n
 the progierties of the joint famiiy was divided.<\/p>\n
..1’ui’*3\u00ab,_ The division in the joint family in the year 1971. is<\/p>\n
 r1ot;’\u00ab..in dispute. It is 3.330 not in dispute that in the said<\/p>\n
5′<\/p>\n
F<\/p>\n
-27..\n<\/p>\n
paititioh plaintii.”f is awarded 45 Cents of land which is B
\nselieclule in the family l<a,rar,"ist. (l\u20acf('.Il(l'c'irli. was allotted 43<\/p>\n
cents, which is A S(_'.l'IE.?(1l.l1G', the 2nd de.i'er1da.r1t, wasv_all_o':ted<\/p>\n
43 eeots, which  C schedule. the 13rd cleife;ri(il\u00abafjt__:'xirgsx<\/p>\n
allotted 43 cents, which is I") schedule father <\/p>\n
Krishna Shenoy was allotted 25 cegzitsgwhiielh is 'ref: s'el1etitJ$lTe.i'<\/p>\n
Now coming to the family .l:e11ffa:'_'cIatefi  1.91721.  oars 5*it  r<\/p>\n
is stated that other than A t:0 E"s..el1e(iuleV'prof)ei*ties: all other
\nimmovable properties .f)e.\u00a7o11g:\u00a7l't()"' s1s_t._'oiT. the gviartives in the
\nfamily karar [Krishna Shehoy  who are at<\/p>\n
No.6 to 12 in  iarhilykarzirl ltisflalso made clear in<\/p>\n
the said far1_1ilyTls:ararV\u00a3",l1atvKrishr1a Shenoy and his daughters
\nwho a.re"at"6 'are-..__j'oih"t. in possession and enjoy the<\/p>\n
samein eq1i.al._rightZ's. ll"-'1't1le: said family karat' and the recitals<\/p>\n
 – rriade’ tl*l”‘t?,E’E3Vi”I1′, is noun’ dispute.<\/p>\n
   s.l6._A”.i7Itier;efore, as on 10.8.1971 there is division in the<\/p>\n
j\u20ac’)il1tf’f21I{1.ily’:._Of\u00a3 Krishna Shenoy and joint family properties<\/p>\n
 were (livi;_r_.i.ed by motes and bo1.m(‘1s. The eor1t:er1ts of said<\/p>\n
 family karat’ clearly discloses that the same is full and final<\/p>\n
34\/)”,-\ufb01g”?\n<\/p>\n
\n
-23-<\/span><\/p>\n
partition between all the members of the family. Since the
\nremaining properties of the joint family other than schedule<\/p>\n
A to E stated therein are allotted to the share Of”‘Kfi\u00a7s}il1a<\/p>\n
Shenoy and his (l2,1ugl1t,ei*s, they eontiiiue to be in ;)os’:}{e’ssit5n_’ .<\/p>\n
thereof as joint. owners and not as 7iiQiI1f. li1I?i’1ily”r3ri’erIil3ers. ‘\/_It”VV<\/p>\n
is to be seen that this is the (1o’c;u1’r_ie;1t’, w,h_ieh”‘ is” lE3x.l:Z*.:1;<\/p>\n
which decides the right and s4t,at.iis of the parties; Tl_V1eref’cn’ie,_’ 1<\/p>\n
as on 10.8.1971 there is totial”.,se\\.ruera.neei_of joint family
\nbetween plaintiff and Cl\u20ac:_fe*:i(lz\u00a7\u00a7_;1ts.v  the contention
\nof plaintiff that partiti.o1j’_ ‘–I,.1r1t1\u20aci’_ f’a.n1ilyiVV~-ltarar is partial
\npartition is      ”\n<\/p>\n
i’_l’he eoliterition efplairitiif is mainly based on Certain<\/p>\n
averments “made  {..3b__.”5f32\/”1982, which was filed by<\/p>\n
Krishna Sl1ei’ioy’ ll years. after the parrtitiosi of joint family<\/p>\n
  properties “taking  The pl-aint in 08.522\/I982 relied<\/p>\n
  tipolnei and made much about t.he pleadings stated<\/p>\n
tthefein Vxviiiijiiaver to be looked into in the light of the family<\/p>\n
 karar\ufb02rilaiietl 10.8.1971 and not the other way, ie., the family<\/p>\n
  cannot be lookecl into in the light of the plaint<\/p>\n
a\u00a7.vermer1t’s in ()S.522\/1982. First of all the eireurnstarice<\/p>\n
_ 2.9-\n<\/p>\n
1in(;ler which the said suit IlIGII1bu(\u00bb)I’S ofthe family as per
\nfamiiy karat’. A reziti~i.;ig; of  pifa’iI1lta averments in its
\nentirety does not give… 11:3′-V. iti(iir:ationV”‘=t112it there is an<\/p>\n
admission ri’iaitlell3:ySheno3fi:h’at”the partition dated
\n10.8.1972    _<\/p>\n
 17. ‘i;iie._:e11tire f’eaEli1’1g of the plaint clearly indicates<\/p>\n
the ]i1aintift’l””\u00e9ii’id 1st clefendarit herein from the<\/p>\n
 B\ufb01fgivfl\ufb02lilig’af\u20ac~,_tfQ1,1bl\u20ac mon.gers not only to defendants but to<\/p>\n
the otlicjririenibers of the family. It  also seen that it is at<\/p>\n
 their ‘1ivnsta:’1(:e partition has taken place, When once<\/p>\n
 pVartitioi’1 has taken place in the year 1971, there appears to<\/p>\n
 no rriiitiiality between them right from 1971 to 1982 <\/p>\n
g\/U\/Au-‘E<\/p>\n
– 39 _
\nthe date when suit in ()S.522\/ E982 was filed by their father
\nand brothers against t.heir1 for deckaration that partition
\ndated 10.8.1971 is valid and birldirig. In the said suit,<\/p>\n
nowhere it is me1:1t.ioned that suit B and C schedule<\/p>\n
properties are to be treated as joint family prope_rfties–\u00ab’ ,l_1e_l:d  y<\/p>\n
Krishria Shenoy. it is also not in atliriissioifiii ‘tl7:1’e._said <\/p>\n
plaint that joint family does exist izljetweeri <\/p>\n
plaintiff and defendants 1 to.*3.,_ The’refL:re, refeteiicde to l.’I’i’3.”_><\/p>\n
portion of pleading in paragraph _2 the remaining
\nagricultural properties!”werej:f(le_ei\u20ac1e_(l_’ito. be kept as joint<\/p>\n
family properties of the  __if:t1eai1 that joint<\/p>\n
l-Hr1(lui_U11(.iiyi(1\u00e9:d_ family of . Krishnei Shenoy and his four sons
\nexist. ‘Ii’1js”pleading”will-.t_ha’fe to be read and understood in<\/p>\n
the light of  ‘E3 of family karar dated 10.8.19? 1.<\/p>\n
 The-.t:efofre,  faiiiilyv as meant and stated by Krishna<\/p>\n
   tlie>._s\u00a7;:id plaint refers to himself and his daughters<\/p>\n
to the said property is allotted. The plaintiff<\/p>\n
 (.:anr1ot make much out of it and can elaim the same as joint<\/p>\n
V’ ‘ —  .’7a_mi’ly property.\n<\/p>\n
‘L\/=.,”v’\u00a7=<\/p>\n
-31-<\/span><\/p>\n
18. The coricept of partial partit.ion is alien to Hindu
\nLaw. When once there is severance of status between the<\/p>\n
parties by way ()f’pa1’t.iti()11 by rnetes and boun(.1.s, :’it.h–as<\/p>\n
taken place in this case on 10.8.l\u00a3I)’71., it is_.”n()t_fo*peI-i <\/p>\n
plaintiff or “Est defendant. in the 1)rest:rit sui_’\u00a3’.”t.oV’  <\/p>\n
suit B sclieelule property is joint :fa1ni’ly..*ipropert.y’ <\/p>\n
have a share in the said property_, The v.\u00ab:onteI1’tio1\u00e9\u00a7 o.f_p1:1.i11tii’f–_l’<\/p>\n
that as on the date of filing o_fTt;l1:is–..s1iit..i’11.l_l996v}tl1e joint
\nfamily of Krishna Slienogfantl P\u00a7jin’tft1_hL?A.nttiyided. joint family
\nof Krishna Shermy exist;~-betvyeenp VVhir’nseV1:i”~.a;’id his four sons<\/p>\n
cannot be ae\u00e9\u00a7ept&;eicl,. Iili\u00e9ss co_;.51t;c2r1tio1i’that the partition dated<\/p>\n
10.8.1971 r1lriti’er _far1ii13r’vl'<ai_'_z.1r is partial partition also canriot
\nbe accepteti.  court below on this aspect is<\/p>\n
without   EEAI1(1V"j.ilS{i\ufb01()ati()l"i. Probably the court<\/p>\n
  beloiv Zrriust haVe..__earried away by a reading of a stray<\/p>\n
.' seritenee.of\u00e9vzplairit in OS522\/1.982 without giving credence<\/p>\n
H to' .t\u00a31eVV'(ioet_irne,nt. under which severance between Krishna<\/p>\n
Sl—\u00a3.ei1oy.lr:is sons has taken place way back on<\/p>\n
 .E..0.8.:i $371.1. 'l'here.t'ore, this Court answer the 1*" point" for<\/p>\n
2 ., '(torssi('1ei'at:ion in tile 11c-rg:–itive.<\/p>\n
'\u00ab<.,"'\u00a7,x;\n<\/p>\n
f<\/p>\n
-32..\n<\/p>\n
’19. Now coming to f\u00e9lmi point for consicleration, when<\/p>\n
once it is held that. the pz1.rtii:ioIi which has taken p1;’\u00a3er\u00a7 on<\/p>\n
10.8.1971 is total partition by metes and bou11_d.s_’4″:iVet{\u00a7a’ee’iw.x<\/p>\n
the parties and in terms of clause 5 of  <\/p>\n
than schedule A to E to said fa111i1y’1{\u00e9i.rar. aiipother”prop’e-\ufb01iens;<\/p>\n
of joint family are stated to be   of <\/p>\n
Shenoy and his daughters, riariridejiypdefendants   this 11<\/p>\n
proceedings. In the light-iof such eLVp_’i’eoi4_g1 in “f’E1i}’1J’,}_\\JI~’3k3I’3.I’ the
\nfather of plaintiff narneiigf arid defendants 5
\nto 11 are entitled to tjiiemszirne divided amongst<\/p>\n
themselves:’=pa:’tition of the said properties.
\nTherefore: the  between them on 28.3.1984<\/p>\n
under_ a registered’. partitioii deed is just and proper. The<\/p>\n
” ‘~   eliiottped  of defendants 5 to 1 I in the ratio of 25<\/p>\n
een,ts of-l;u’i(‘\u00a3~–.ir1 the said partition is just and proper and<\/p>\n
  be inva1i(1.. ‘Fherei”()re, the finding of the<\/p>\n
cotirt t)e1o*x_7+Lij’..oAn this aspect is required to be set aside in this<\/p>\n
 z~1ppezii..__’3 ‘ITl:1erei’ore, this Court answer the 2″‘? point for<\/p>\n
” (;onsiderati.o_n in the negative.\n<\/p>\n
\n
20. Now eoniirig to the SW1 point for c:()r1si(le1fai.ior1<\/p>\n
regarding execution of the Will, admittedly an _eXt*e1*1;:; <\/p>\n
cents of land was allotted to the share of VVSii:ei1oy’liat  ‘<\/p>\n
schedule E in the family karar (late(.l:_:Ali(J}8′;.l   <\/p>\n
has bequeathed in favour of his_ list l(ia1’ighter.1.51;h :defer9}g(iant”” *’<\/p>\n
under a registered Will (iated   in his
\npleadings has not cllaliei’1geti Vi:h”(;’.:’ Wherevas in his
\nexa1nination~ir1~chief dai;etl_ li8\u00a7\u00a7)1biET~9ii3’l1as stated as<\/p>\n
under:\n<\/p>\n
 ” ‘fati”ler had executed
\nZallflfilli ll3’\ufb01a;>lVV.:’1982u_”VihV\ufb02favour of my elder
\n\u00e9;istei9 c’Iefe’\ufb01f(lzif1tvlVio__.V5* in respect of 25 cents of
\nland out of. property  B schedule<\/p>\n
~pifopei’E3J., amt} l7 have not questioned the said<\/p>\n
    aaaaa <\/p>\n
‘ ‘i’l1e.Vsa_i(i~eex{ilt}e11c:e of piaint,iff in his exami:1ation–in–chief<\/p>\n
‘clearly i.ai\u20ac”osVa\\ivay his right to challenge the same. So far as<\/p>\n
the”‘2ii(\u00a7’.”Wi1vi”iS coilcernecl, it is a registerecl Will.  plaintiff<\/p>\n
it  tiioughlll he was aware of the same has not challengeci the<\/p>\n
 except: making a referericze that exeeutiori of said Will is<\/p>\n
E
\nifzjum<\/p>\n
– 34 –\n<\/p>\n
not within his kn0w’ieclge. 2.1.n(1 his father has no right to
\nexecute the Will. The said eonteiition is taken by him in the<\/p>\n
light of the fact that he was contending that suit <\/p>\n
schechile properties are the properties of .~_4}:C)iIl_tA \u00b0fziirniiy: *<\/p>\n
(:(:ansist:ii’ig of himself, his hirotliers (lef7e.n(1a.r1_’tis”:iV’ 3 .?a;:i4ti.Vhi-s <\/p>\n
father Krishna Sheney. “l”here’f0re, “his1e()iiVtenti()’1is_is th\u00e9ithis<\/p>\n
father had no right to e.xec:1t\u00a7e__t.i*:.e said-Will and ..sax<i1e is 2 L'<\/p>\n
not binding on him.\n<\/p>\n
21. In View of  ‘.tF:3\u00a7a#:.  has given a
\n\ufb01nding to the ef\ufb01eet. tliziig  family between
\nKrishna      to an end on
\nex(?cL1tidnV_   the contention of
\nI)1aiIItif’f”ff1f1t si:’.w.i_l.’V  property being joint family<\/p>\n
pr(>pert.y is iiegateti. When once it is negated then it is not<\/p>\n
 opei’ fc\u00e9r him to chwsiilevngge the right of his father to execute<\/p>\n
  the it is not his contention that the Will is not<\/p>\n
exee1ited.hy_.his father or that the ex.eeution of the same is<\/p>\n
 unde.f_s(‘ispici01is cireiimstariee or that the same is not the<\/p>\n
 W_i1ui””A_0f his father. The ehallerige to the Wili is on the basis<\/p>\n
‘ thait his faither has no right to execute the Will. In the light<\/p>\n
-35-<\/span><\/p>\n
of the ii1’1d.i.1.1g given by this (\ufb01ourt on issue Nos.1 and 2 the
\nCOI’1t(‘,l’ll.l()I1 of plEl]’l’1′[i.ff that suit B and C schedule properties
\nare joint family properties being negated and his claim to the<\/p>\n
same is put. to rest. Theri his contention that his fatl’ief\u00bbehas<\/p>\n
no right to execute the Will does not have<\/p>\n
‘i’he1-efore, the Will exec:utec.1 by his father <\/p>\n
valid and the validity of the sarnehlcarirliot the -iqueVstioi’ie’d iii?<\/p>\n
this suit. If plaintiff had CEOI1V1L\u20acEr1Cli:?d..l.li$,1t the  “has <\/p>\n
into CXiSl,CI.’lCC under sus1)i(:ioii’sVE:ir(:1.1.II1star1ee.or tlie Will is<\/p>\n
not executed by his father orttitl iaila e’o.1_1cocted”arid created<\/p>\n
document, then probahlyl’ l:ile~~E’\\2i.;’ioii__1y:(i”‘–hays had right to<\/p>\n
conterid tha”t’l5f_-tltief3.sar.tie~\u00ab ifequired to be proved and
\nestablisliecll’ by’ttie~lprof)o:iintl(ar of the Will. Here what is<\/p>\n
being ..challehgeci~l)y hiih: in the suit and as well as in the<\/p>\n
W  – 2ip”p–e.a1:,.i’g, the riglit\ufb02otl his father to execute the Will, which is<\/p>\n
  1’\u00a7iit,li.e)~h’ye. flE1(1i.I}\u00a7__.\u00a7 given by this court on point Nos.1<\/p>\n
ampl  l”‘l’lieref()1″\u00a3:, this Court answer 3?” point for<\/p>\n
 eonsicler}:ti<)r1 in the affirmative and hold that the Finding of<\/p>\n
"ii "c:_ou11, below that the Will dated 7.6.1982 and 18.4.1984<\/p>\n
it<\/p>\n
t  –. t:h(:s—-rieg\u00a7atiVe,.\n<\/p>\n
-36-<\/span><\/p>\n
<*,xeCl,1t.e(l by K;:.'isl*1nz;1 Sllenoy is valid and bintiing on all the<\/p>\n
parties.\n<\/p>\n
light of the fact that oral partition which is’7\u00ab’:r__e(ivii’eeV(i  <\/p>\n
writing as famiiy kart-11′ on .10.8.;i’9″7I”is’  as’-finvai.<\/p>\n
partition between the rnernbers oigf-Ii*;_1cit1 [J.i’1r_.1ivitied –,{.J’oint._<\/p>\n
Family of Krishna Shenoy of  he.”w_as  that’<\/p>\n
in the said partition suit B V.sei1e(i.11’1’e\u00bb_propertvies-Ware being
\nallotted to the share of 4′ ‘i{:i’s_?’i:3;;f=_\u00a7’i’1e}ioy,a:;d his daughters,
\ndefendants 5 ‘ .11 iflw pro’eeedi.n’gs’V the question of<\/p>\n
granting 1 tAI’2*%\u00a7 s1*i3a,prt:–.’i’r1~\u00ab.’Vthe saici properties or any other
\nshare Ijiaintiff  ‘”(:lefen(1a,i1t does not anse for<\/p>\n
eor1si\u00ab:ieratio’n…, ‘I”‘ne’rel”ore.,f tfrle aforesaid point is answered in<\/p>\n
”  23. Fizlally coming to 5″! point for ().O1’1Si(i\u20acl’&tl’OIl, in the<\/p>\n
light oi”, the \ufb01nding given above when partition dated<\/p>\n
2 1();8.,.1 is eonsicierecl as final partition among the<\/p>\n
Aixnenibers of the joint famiiy of Krishna Shenoy in the iight of<\/p>\n
22. Now coining to 4*” point for consiclerationuinathe<\/p>\n
%:i.\n<\/p>\n
.37.\n<\/p>\n
family karar and u.:’1der clause 5 of family karar the suit B
\nand C schedule properties falling to the share of Krishna<\/p>\n
Shenoy and his daughters they had right to <\/p>\n
partition on 28.3.1984 and a1l()t.ting schedule–p.r0j)le\u00a7~f.i’esltd ~
\nthe share of Krishna Sheney which the is ent.it1″ecl’_’t..0ll’beq1,iestll”
\nthe same under the Will. ‘l’l’1er.ef0r_fe…~ln0’=.shai’e ‘clja-.1 “tie-<\/p>\n
awarded to plaintiff in the sa~it1’p’ropertj.es. Hence; ‘title C,’0urt–_’<\/p>\n
answer the aforesaid point ll”f.r)lr ,c0nSicler_ati0n} in the
\naf\ufb01rmative.\n<\/p>\n
24. In effect this _(..’.0.t1_r–t. while  up all the five<\/p>\n
points for c0;fisiC\u00a7i-sratigjn is hr the ‘qsinion that plaintiff in<\/p>\n
C)S.2037:D\/19S’)’6’l~h.\u00a31$V no man.n_e1’_0f right, title or interest in suit
\nB and  \u00a7>,c3t1\u00a7:d:.:1\u00a79′ on the date of filing of suit<\/p>\n
for the rezietjri_:tI1atfHii’i(ilil.Uricliviclecl Joint family of Krishna<\/p>\n
 A.dissnl\\fetlla1’acl separated as on 10.8.1971 when<\/p>\n
  effected and all the properties of the said joint<\/p>\n
family wa.’3″l{litri(lc>c1 by met:-:5 and bounds under the said<\/p>\n
 fan1ily~ Igarar, which is at Ex.Di. Therefore, in the light of the<\/p>\n
afere\u00absai(i finding of this. Court, the appeal filed by 1st<\/p>\n
cleferitilarit. in RFA.782\/ “5999 is allowed. the judgn’1ent and<\/p>\n
U.\/\\\u00bb’\u00a7_\n<\/p>\n
3.<\/p>\n
– 38-\n<\/p>\n
(‘1e(‘:rc:c passed g1’211’1t.ir1;_>; 1\/12″? sharcr to ple1int1’.ff in B<\/p>\n
9.-che(.iuEe propertios in (_}S..N(>.2()O\/1996 is set aside ancl the<\/p>\n
suit is ciiS11’11’ssed. C()11s(:q11cn’i.iy, the appeai \ufb02ied <\/p>\n
in RFA.N0.784\/ \u00a3999 is (iis.r1.1isse(1 without a11; I:”0rc.1Tt:\u00a7r’L :is; to <\/p>\n
costs.\n<\/p>\n
   Sa\/:\n<\/p>\n
 3uD@E <\/p>\n
kmj\u00a7UDG\u00a7<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Padmanabha Shenoy vs Dr Premachandra Shenoy on 21 December, 2010 Author: V.G.Sabhahit & S.N.Satyanarayana – 1 – IN ‘m1\u00ab: HI(}I~I C()’UR’I’ or” KARNATAKA AT i3A\u00a7\\I(}AL()RE I’)A’1’I’;I_)’.1’HiSTIIE Elm’ if)!\\Y ()1? DECEMBER 2010 PRl”*3SI*3N’i’ ‘[‘E-IF, nON’I3LI’\u00ab: MRJUSTICE v.G. SARI–IA}-u*j1’f’ Q :’ ffj .. \/’ AND \u00abV THE H()N’BLE M_R..;UsT1CE N. REGULAR FIRST AI>PEA1.,Nt\u00a7;’782:\/’19’9\u00a7\u00a7’ A […]<\/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-266450","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nPadmanabha Shenoy vs Dr Premachandra Shenoy on 21 December, 2010 - 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\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Padmanabha Shenoy vs Dr Premachandra Shenoy on 21 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-12-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-22T00:53:51+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=\"38 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Padmanabha Shenoy vs Dr Premachandra Shenoy on 21 December, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-22T00:53:51+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010\"},\"wordCount\":7390,\"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\\\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010\",\"name\":\"Padmanabha Shenoy vs Dr Premachandra Shenoy on 21 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-22T00:53:51+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Padmanabha Shenoy vs Dr Premachandra Shenoy on 21 December, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Padmanabha Shenoy vs Dr Premachandra Shenoy on 21 December, 2010 - 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\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Padmanabha Shenoy vs Dr Premachandra Shenoy on 21 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-12-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-22T00:53:51+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":"38 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Padmanabha Shenoy vs Dr Premachandra Shenoy on 21 December, 2010","datePublished":"2010-12-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-22T00:53:51+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010"},"wordCount":7390,"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\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010","name":"Padmanabha Shenoy vs Dr Premachandra Shenoy on 21 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-12-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-22T00:53:51+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padmanabha-shenoy-vs-dr-premachandra-shenoy-on-21-december-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Padmanabha Shenoy vs Dr Premachandra Shenoy on 21 December, 2010"}]},{"@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\/266450","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=266450"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/266450\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=266450"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=266450"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=266450"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}