{"id":62525,"date":"2008-09-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008"},"modified":"2018-04-14T19:54:45","modified_gmt":"2018-04-14T14:24:45","slug":"siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Siriyamma W\/O Gowdara Veerappa vs Kariyappa S\/O Todara Kariyappa on 8 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Siriyamma W\/O Gowdara Veerappa vs Kariyappa S\/O Todara Kariyappa on 8 September, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: Jawad Rahim<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\n\nDATED THIS THE 8\"' DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2008\n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HON'E5LE MRJUSTICE JAWAD RAHIM'\":.\ufb02'--.rF..\n\nR.S.A. No.1016\/2002 (sp).df   A\n\nBETWEEN:   \n\n1. Smt. SIRIYAMMA   A\nW\/O GOWDARA VEERAPPA \nAge;62 years, ' ~\nHOUSE HOLD,\n\nR\/O. ANABUR    \nGOLLARAHATTI_\\i~ILLA_GE_ A  .4 V \nJAGALUR TALUK\" ~  r  \"\n\n2 SMT. GIRI--.]AMMA'\"\"\u00bbh\u00abif A\n\n w\/o.' 'z'3A..LAF*PA T \n'=..(H0'Nz\\:A'M\ufb01xR%ADI')-E.TA  '\nHOUSE HOLD v&\"--~ \" \nAG'R.1CL.tLTuR1sT.__i:~\n-..R\/0.'ANA'BUR  '\n GOLLARA-HATT1 VILLAGE\n' 53'AG'Ai.UR TALUK\n4,    ...APPELLANTS\n\nR\" = :('t\u00e9<y $5' PATIL, ADV., )\n\n KARIYAPPA\n\nA 8\/0 TODARA KARIYAPPA\nAGED ABOUT 55 YEARS\nAGRICULTURIST\nCHIKKABANNIHATTI GOLLARAHATTI\n\n\n\n3\n\nfrom entering upon or enjoying the properties in question.\n2. Contextual facts as manifest from the case\n\npapers reveal that Kariyappa, the respondent herein, who<\/pre>\n
also happens to be proximately related to the  ~<\/p>\n
Siriyamma, Basamma and Girijamma filed <\/p>\n
No.13\/1997 on the file of the Civil ‘}’u’dgt.e   if<\/p>\n
alleging that the husband of thel’:’fj_’rst_lVa$ppei’iaht.-\u00ab. <\/p>\n
Veerappa was the absoluVtev.:crwnerV’ o.f.’th:e_’*_,  Syf’<\/p>\n
l\\Eo.205 measuring 7 Acres and  (‘3″L-2,.ntas.”‘ He had, during<\/p>\n
is life time, agreed tolls-_=__-ll or-nito  Kariyappa, the<\/p>\n
‘schedule for a valuable sale
\nConsiderat.i_on,,  Gowdra Veerappa had
\n xRs.x3’,OV(V),VQ\/__-flas advance and the balance was
\n~A ;a’gr,eed_v4t0ihlgexpaid later. However, during his lifetime itself,
\nif’whihthout:’\u00e9V’\u00e9–f’egVi’stering the deed of sale, he received the<\/p>\n
balancegg amount to make up Rs.10,000\/~ and had<\/p>\n
“the_refo”re, no subsisting right, title or interest. He<\/p>\n
lilacklnowledged it before the plaintiff and agreed to register<\/p>\n
if “the document as and when required. However, from 1988<\/p>\n
till 1995, the document was not executed and Gowdra<\/p>\n
3\/<\/p>\n
4<\/span><\/p>\n
Veerappa died in the year 1995 leaving behind the<\/p>\n
defendants to succeed to his estate.\n<\/p>\n
3. The defendants (appellants herein), lf’4).ell”i{Ij”‘f,l’J||Y<\/p>\n
aware of the transaction between Gowdra <\/p>\n
the plaintiff and also acknowledgingthat_ent~ire_\u00bb.a\u00a7*h:oLI,nt_,of’<\/p>\n
Rs.10,000\/- was paid to Gowdi\u00e9a \\{e.e.ra4ppa,i.”ex’e’cust_ed:;_a<\/p>\n
deed of acknowledgementvion.._,17.o3_.i996,i;d%’eg;i:ariVdd: thatiii\u00bb<\/p>\n
they will execute the sale deed-,,as,,_and.’v\u00a2.hlen required by
\nthe plaintiff. He alleige-J_’that;dvle’spi’te’~e,xecuting the said<\/p>\n
acknowledgement deeds-on ‘the defendants<\/p>\n
have tailed toV”tra’in,sfer4Vt;\u00a7’\u00e9–property and he issued notice in
\nthe yearVV”1.._9!9? calli\u00e9ng  them to execute the document.<\/p>\n
Noti,ce_lseht on” ‘2.7,_Q_3..1997 was served on them, but, they<\/p>\n
r ;d’i~d,,not’resp\u00abon__d. On that basis, he filed the suit.<\/p>\n
 z “‘f”i’he suit was resisted by the defendants<\/p>\n
  contenlding that there was no privity of contract between<\/p>\n
 and the plaintiff and they had not executed any<\/p>\n
it Wagreement, much less the so called acknowledgement \/<\/p>\n
ratification deed dated 17.05.1996. They also denied that<\/p>\n
if<\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
Gowdra Veeranna had received any money or Rs.10,000\/–
\nin 1988 or that he had agreed to sell the property of the<\/p>\n
plaintiff.\n<\/p>\n
5. Specifically, they alleged that the_:”‘p_l’gaVi.’nt4iff<\/p>\n
Kariyappa, who had married the sister of Gowidrav <\/p>\n
was related as brother-in–law.g””‘l–!eg hadll”rriVi.su.sedf,theft’<\/p>\n
proximate relationship and the   <\/p>\n
Veerappa in him to exploit had”?\n<\/p>\n
made good with lot Q.f..money— faimvily  on the<\/p>\n
pretext of taking careii\u00e9of the Gowdra Veerappa,<\/p>\n
had  They also alleged that he had
\nobtained”\u00bb_certaVi’n_”apa”pe’rs from Gowdra Veerappa and<\/p>\n
m.isgJsved Vthe.”‘s\u00abam_e.g. They specifically alleged that till<\/p>\n
‘ \u00a36-o_wd.r_a\u00bbVe,e’ra__ppa was alive, the plaintiff did not raise the<\/p>\n
‘–is.s’:.;e bet’.’a–us:e’ there was no such agreement. Only after<\/p>\n
the ‘demise of Gowdra Veerappa in Llanuary 1995, the<\/p>\n
 “piliainntivfif approached the Tahsildar seeking for transfer of<\/p>\n
 of the property in question to his name, contending<\/p>\n
if “that his wife — Guddamma, the only legal heir of Gowdra<\/p>\n
Veerappa had no objection. Tahsildar received the<\/p>\n
\/}\u00a2\u00bb.’7\/<\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
application of the plaintiff and assigned it case
\nNo.1?-lC.O6\/96-97. In the said case, on issuance of<\/p>\n
notice, wife of the plaintiff – Guddamma <\/p>\n
the only heir of Gowdra Veerappa and on  <\/p>\n
that she had no objection to trarisfer’l<a_tl'–1a in narlnellar<\/p>\n
the piaintiff–Kariyappa, the ggkatha'.wa's_ztransferi'ed. if<\/p>\n
these facts were learnt  Iegxal.represe'ntat'i\\les of'<\/p>\n
Gowdra Veerappa, ,t'l1~e_y aip'p'roa'chf\u00e9d._'thel""E'ah"si|dar and
\npointed out to the fraud and the order
\nwas stayed?   the plaintiff had
\ntransferradlfthe  and they sought for its
\nrectificationt\u00bb\ufb02l3'ei'ng tlhlusivldeffeated in his sinistered design,
\nhe filedxtrhue _suit.,_.'u'VA'.clia_n'g4ing his plan, as if he was the<\/p>\n
ptir-ttghaser. V.lPai.nVti_ng out to these facts, the defendants<\/p>\n
' ;C'enten_vded\u00ab..thva_t the plaintiff was a fraud. He was a cheat.<\/p>\n
if '-.EVl.e'–..wa.s'explfdiltler and he was making unlawful gain of their<\/p>\n
inn"oce"n\u00e9ce'.4" They also pointed out to the fact that the<\/p>\n
  l'p'fra.perty was valued more than Rs.2,00,000\/~\u00ab and the sale<\/p>\n
 shown being Rs.10,000\/~ was too meagre.\n<\/p>\n
6. Learned trial Judge framed relevant issues<\/p>\n
it\/’<\/p>\n
‘7<\/p>\n
based on the material proposition in the pleadings of the
\nparties and the parties did lead evidence. The plairi’t.iff on<\/p>\n
his part, examined himself and two witnesses E;iy_”nam’e.,”GV.<\/p>\n
Veeranna and Ajjappa and placed reliance <\/p>\n
documents, while the defendants”-4″appellants”e_xa’mined<\/p>\n
three witnesses and produced no”*evid_ence.’inAdrocuments,<\/p>\n
Learned trial Judge consideri’ng””tihe nV.ature~v.o:f’.=twheueikidencew’<\/p>\n
on record, held that theV_’plaitrit’i’ffi.h’ad:”e.stablish’ed”that there
\nwas transaction of ra Veerappa
\nfof a sum  “the learned trial
\nJudge not proved that he was
\n  his part of the contract and he
\nalso heldV’tthat “s:u’.ii’t’was filed more than nine years<\/p>\n
after the ag reei’ne_n_t\u00e9 of sale was executed in 1988, specific<\/p>\n
‘;p’erfor.maince”vcannot be ordered. Learned trial Judge<\/p>\n
.’decr’eed partly directing the defendants to return<\/p>\n
Rs:”1Q,”t)QO’\/ii\u00bb with interest at 18% per annum to the<\/p>\n
  plaigntiff. The said judgement was assailed by the plaintiffs<\/p>\n
 iieguiar Appeal No.63\/2000 before the Civil Judge (Sr.<\/p>\n
if “HDn.), Davanagere. Learned first appellate Judge went one<\/p>\n
step further and magnanimously ignored the fact that the<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
7. This is a second appeai. At the time of
\nadmission, the foilowing substantiai question of raw has<\/p>\n
been framed:\n<\/p>\n
“Whether the iower ap:5eA|’ia’te ,_
\njustified in reversing the
\npower of the triai cora’irtr\u00ab..yested’unVdeirV:’S.ect,i_,oVn VA
\n20 of the Specific ReiiefH’Act?”_ it
\nBut, it is noticed that ‘two rei’\u00e9vant,.,q’ue;tionsi’of”Iiaw, which
\nare substantive question-s:_of,”I:avv  decision, have<\/p>\n
not been raised_:fand=__ 1,; -::~’th’ereiorei.._.:\\.raise the foilowing<\/p>\n
additionai substa’ht4i’a!,Cjuestioiis of law for consideration :-<\/p>\n
__1. i”~\\Nas_’not’=_true suit hit by provisions of
\nV Art”i’i:!.e,_54vof the Limitation Act ?\n<\/p>\n
    not the suit cfaim vitiated by fraud ?\n<\/p>\n
8, .”ii:’1-__I’:;have heard the learned counsei appearing for
\n, the pa’rt:;ies and in order to be fuily convinced about the
\n_ fapctuai position, I had requested the learned counsel for<\/p>\n
the respondent to produce “the records reiating to the<\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
affirmed by the legal representatives of Gowdra Veerappa
\non 17.05.1996. This, therefore, demonstratively depicts<\/p>\n
the fact that the plaintiff has been guilty of suppress_i’ngf~the<\/p>\n
facts and has been making statements.\u00a7’_s.uiti~njg–.__f<\/p>\n
convenience before the authorities, who””p*e\u00e9ffo,rrn ‘qua_si’*~<\/p>\n
judicial functions. The statement recsorderd,wiVti1 ‘refveriue<\/p>\n
officer is a statement on oath’.\u00ab-.._V Evenin such’Ei..,js.t.a,ternent,.:v<\/p>\n
the plaintiff has claimed to?”-b_e-.,_sthe”‘successor-in~tit|e
\nthrough his wife and_..V:.”not’\u00e9._ aij.T.iag_reern_ent holder or a
\npurchaser under agre.ement ‘o-f_saieL_  second aspect<\/p>\n
manifest from  ‘_e\\.<iclence; is',th.at 'the""absolute ownership<\/p>\n
of Govwdra"  brought in question at any<\/p>\n
time. Itfis alsoxV'n.ot\u00a5i_n' dispute that Gowdra Veerappa died<\/p>\n
 ingfhe'month""o.f__\u00a7_anuary 1995. After his death, the<\/p>\n
rd'efencia'nts,:'namely, Smt. Siriamma, the first wife of<\/p>\n
'\u20ac3owdra'iJ_eeraVppa, Smt. Balamma, second wife of Gowdra<\/p>\n
Veuerap"p,a"alnd Smt. Girijamma, the daughter of Gowdra<\/p>\n
  "Veerappa are the only surviving heirs of Gowdra Veerappa.<\/p>\n
fifuddamma, the wife of the plaintiff is the sister of<\/p>\n
if m"Gowdra Veerappa. Therefore, even in the heir-ship, linear<\/p>\n
descendant is only the daughter of Gowdra Veerappa –~<\/p>\n
. 33<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
Girijamma, while, Siriyamma and Balamma are the
\nsuccessors–in~title by law of succession. Guddamma
\ntherefore, gets excluded in the presence of heirs’—,of a<\/p>\n
higher degree and hence, the claim of Gundarnma_\u00bbtha4t,;~s’lle<\/p>\n
was the only heir of Gowdra Veerappa wVas'”~a frj_avllvdtllen’t_’ V’<\/p>\n
statement made only to serve the purpo.se._of’hAe_t_n’_ts’,’who<\/p>\n
claim title to the property.””‘e\u00ab..f”lfind no:d’iffi.culty'”Von this<\/p>\n
aspect because in the spit  t,hie._&plaintif’f,””he himself
\ncategorically states suppriessinxgl  facts that the<\/p>\n
appellants are”thej–onl:y heirs;  only heirs, they<\/p>\n
executed’– ‘theft’ai:ltn’oyy’l’e:d’g–ement \/ ratification deed on
\n17.05.1995.’ tady.,. “it.:’i..s to be noticed that in a suit for<\/p>\n
specific’ perfor’l:nan_c_e, it is the agreement of sale which<\/p>\n
i V:b’i’n,ds._th.e’\u00ab.palrt_ies that should be sought to be enforced.<\/p>\n
H  of sale, according to the plaintiff, is of the<\/p>\n
year.  He failed to produce the said agreement<\/p>\n
 he-forevlllthe trial Court and has produced only the so called<\/p>\n
‘AA”acl<'nowledgement\/ ratification deed executed by the legal<\/p>\n
if "heirs of Gowdra Veerappa executed on 17.05.1996.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the plaintiff had actually not sought<\/p>\n
15<\/span><\/p>\n
specific performance was most essential and necessary.
\nThe decree of specific performance can certainly be<\/p>\n
refused if it is seen by the Courts that it gives’.’,:u”ndue<\/p>\n
advantage to the purchaser and it gives unfair’*’ad.’y’~ii,nta.t_j’e.<\/p>\n
to him in acquiescence. It also to be noti_ced”_:wVhe.tl1er <\/p>\n
hardship flowing from such an order <\/p>\n
sefler than the purchaser. in the ins_t’a~nt case.,.:even ift’he”g<\/p>\n
agreement was held to be  it was ex\u00e9cuited in the
\nyear 1988. The plai:n’ti.ff iiad_’,Ano.i;.,’iSk\\.ught touenforce it
\nduring the lifetime of tif;_eV’l’e>V<VeiciuVt{ant"~i,le'.-,',_'Qowdra Veerappa<\/p>\n
tilt 19o5,iii\u00a7r;.\u00e9 .p'e;ri.od–iyof.'over-ei\u00e9jht years. Though the
\nagreem_ent'_it'seE'f':Vh'as  produced, but, even if there<\/p>\n
be any  agreeVm_e'nt:.\\f..'i'the plaintiff does not say as to<\/p>\n
 what was the p'eri_o__c,l.vof time stipufated for completion of<\/p>\n
'  If there was any period of time stipulated,<\/p>\n
'th.e"nialsoifftjhl\u00e9"plaintiff was expected to seek completion of<\/p>\n
 transaction as is provided under Section 46 of the Indian<\/p>\n
V'  Con-tyract Act, which reads as under:\n<\/p>\n
” Where, by the contract, a promise! is to
\nperform his promise without appfication by the<\/p>\n
promisee, and no time for performance is<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
against the plaintiff. However, considering the proximal
\nrelationship between the plaintiff and the defendants, I<\/p>\n
refrain from passing any order in this regard, but’,’~.lieal_Ve_ it<\/p>\n
to the defendants to initiate such proceeding_’s:..a’g’ain’stT <\/p>\n
plaintiff as they may feel just and.;neC.\u20ac\u00a2Ssa_r\\}}'”‘*::’*:V,  _ V’
\nThis appeal is, therefore, _agliovi’red’7_’with<,_'coasts=<\/p>\n
throughout. The judgement_passed—- 1.39-the Cii\/ilg.v'Judg'e.(JrV.'*a'<\/p>\n
Dn.) & JMFC., in o.s. No.13\/'1!\u00a7:97_dated. 'A02l:06'Lr2_0V00 and<\/p>\n
the judgement passedmibv  JudVge"x(Sr. Dn.),<\/p>\n
Davanag–er,e}"iin  motels\/\u00e9oooidated 13.08.2002 are set<\/p>\n
aside.l7–.The s'uit"of-\u00bb.theVpira:iin'ti_'ff.shali stand dismissed.<\/p>\n
Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
JUDGE<\/p>\n
 sums  <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Siriyamma W\/O Gowdara Veerappa vs Kariyappa S\/O Todara Kariyappa on 8 September, 2008 Author: Jawad Rahim IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 8″‘ DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2008 BEFORE THE HON’E5LE MRJUSTICE JAWAD RAHIM'”:.\ufb02’–.rF.. R.S.A. No.1016\/2002 (sp).df A BETWEEN: 1. Smt. SIRIYAMMA A W\/O GOWDARA VEERAPPA Age;62 years, […]<\/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-62525","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSiriyamma W\/O Gowdara Veerappa vs Kariyappa S\/O Todara Kariyappa on 8 September, 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\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Siriyamma W\/O Gowdara Veerappa vs Kariyappa S\/O Todara Kariyappa on 8 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-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=\"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-04-14T14:24:45+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Siriyamma W\\\/O Gowdara Veerappa vs Kariyappa S\\\/O Todara Kariyappa on 8 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-14T14:24:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1914,\"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\\\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Siriyamma W\\\/O Gowdara Veerappa vs Kariyappa S\\\/O Todara Kariyappa on 8 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-14T14:24:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Siriyamma W\\\/O Gowdara Veerappa vs Kariyappa S\\\/O Todara Kariyappa on 8 September, 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":"Siriyamma W\/O Gowdara Veerappa vs Kariyappa S\/O Todara Kariyappa on 8 September, 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\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Siriyamma W\/O Gowdara Veerappa vs Kariyappa S\/O Todara Kariyappa on 8 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-04-14T14:24:45+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Siriyamma W\/O Gowdara Veerappa vs Kariyappa S\/O Todara Kariyappa on 8 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-14T14:24:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008"},"wordCount":1914,"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\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008","name":"Siriyamma W\/O Gowdara Veerappa vs Kariyappa S\/O Todara Kariyappa on 8 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-14T14:24:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/siriyamma-wo-gowdara-veerappa-vs-kariyappa-so-todara-kariyappa-on-8-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Siriyamma W\/O Gowdara Veerappa vs Kariyappa S\/O Todara Kariyappa on 8 September, 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\/62525","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=62525"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62525\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=62525"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=62525"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=62525"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}