{"id":81531,"date":"2008-07-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-07-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008"},"modified":"2018-11-15T15:19:19","modified_gmt":"2018-11-15T09:49:19","slug":"m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008","title":{"rendered":"M Narayana vs Smt Ramakka on 21 July, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
M Narayana vs Smt Ramakka on 21 July, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: K.Ramanna<\/div>\n
IN THE HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT' BANi%;;\u00a7mf:_R\u00a3: '%\n\nDATED THIS THE 22\" DAY &;%z:.:,v,%\u00ab2.m_%  I\n\n$*$E:\u00a7E*'(}\u00a3=5.lfZ\n\n-Tm \u00a7\u00ab\u00a70N'I%L\u00a7f. MR,.J{:'\u00a7T\u00a7%::\u20ac K ?\u00e9A~M\ufb01F'm\"25  \n\nEE{_.3\u00a5~{JZA\u00a7? F}1??;'3\":3K%_:\"39I%?\u00bb4\u00a7;?\u00a7; 593:, W53\/.2:}::.':--..  \n\nBEWWEEN:\n\nI\n\n < AN\u00a5):  '\n\nM i"-farayaua.  _    - \n8\/0 33116   A '  = \n71 yrs.   if  'V '  , -3'  .\n\nSubbanna\ufb02   \ns; c: latc Mum' V\u00e9nkatappa. _'\n67 ' V    " Appcllsmts\n- bot.h\u00b0.a1t\u00e9 rfa \u00abGm\ufb02en\nA. -Opp; Chanriramma Choultxy\n~  Swa\ufb01\ufb01gal'  \u00ab ..... \n E'za'13ga3pre~33\n\nV  --  Ashok Hamnahalli, Adm;\n\nRazrgai\u00e9ika\n\n3 ~ ii?\/9 EH Na.rmm.g1pa\n , 53"\u00a7:rs, rja \n Eiiciam I-\ufb02fohii\nE Hosak-ate Tajuk\n \u00a53ar:gaZo.m Disttrict.\n\nSakamma\nW\/0 iatr: M11n.iven}:atapp.a\n\n\n\n \n\nV4\n\n89 yrs, 213 Grape Garden\n\nOpp: Chandramzna Choultzy;  \nSevanagar \nBangalore-33\n\n- since dead, by I...Rs. -'~ :s:t.$1l\u00e911:I.ts V\nand respondents- 1,3  "\n\n3 Sapojamma\nW\/o Ramanna  _ \n65 yrs, r\/a Nadavathj V '   \nAxmagondanahalli\ufb02aijli *   V'\nHosakotc  I    \nBangaiem \ufb02isttici.  \n4 Lakshm;ikgnma~.mma.' \u00ab. '\nWin --B\u00e9s:hegi:s*;e*da-- _ \n162 yrs; 1}\u20ac--a_Huska1;*"-.,._ .\nejdam I=I:)bii,"'A}_io.-sa1<<)te__Taluk\nBagggalgm Dist\ufb01ct\ufb01  J  Respondents\nV  (By'Sri\u00e9"3r L Vishwanath, Adv for R-1\n1?'?\u00ab1,v__$_\u00a2&s. 4 are L.Rs. ofdeceased R-2\nR-3 85 4 are served)\n\n "     is \ufb02ied under Section 95 gr cps against\nthe -.,3'ud.g'n"1ent;= and decree dated 7~3~2()O3 passed in\n\nO.AS.,4No.4349;g-' 1986 on the file of XV Add1.City Civil Judge,\nBangakre decreeing the suit for partition, separate\n\n*..,posee9;e,ie'n, me:-me pm\ufb01ts, future mesne pro\ufb01ts, costs, etc.,.\n\n._  V. ";This appeal having been heard and reserved,\n  Csmiiig cm for prenouncement this day, the Court\n"   _'\u00a7ie1ivered the following;\n\n\n\n  '};ir:;r 1\/\u00e9\ufb01shaxf:  for masnc pmiits contendiag that herself\n\n_ "  to 5 art the sons and daughters of 011: Sri\n  and 1\u00b0' defendant; that their father\n%  \u00a3u;,%giV%%;;;;f03-05w 1924; that after the death of their father they\n to the suit schedule property and the same is\n\n  joint possession of the plaintiff and defendant 1 in 5\n\nJUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
The appellants\/dcft::1M1da11t N-o_$..l?,__and_*3V  u u
\nCami: have come up with
\njudgment and decree dated
\n4349\/1936 on the \ufb01le 9f the    Judge
\nAt Bangalore,     declaxing that
\nshe is entitle to ,1\/6″‘   property
\nand directing  her in possession
\nof pm-pcrty  TF3  — f\n<\/p>\n
2. For  the panics will be
\nI’6’f6I’.\u00a3’Cd tog fay  l;\u00e9:fo;’e the triad Court.
\n V’   \ufb01bzjsf  of the case is that, the<\/p>\n
 1 herein \ufb01led a suit for partition of<\/p>\n
  portion of the grape garden was<\/p>\n
  in addition to the shares that were<\/p>\n
‘  other defendants in the said gape garden.
\n ;her case that though a partition was e\ufb01ect she<\/p>\n
  e  , V _  “1:ts:1-‘if actuaily put in possession ef the same and the<\/p>\n
 ‘~,Tciefeixdants I to 3 continued in the possession of the said<\/p>\n
which consist of grape garden and a
\ntogether with site bearing 83! no. .59\/2′   V
\nand 6 guntas situated at Lmgmafepm\ufb01\ufb01
\nthe deathlef Muniven1\u00a7atappe_v:a….;:aeebeya\ufb02;V  L’
\nthe family properties were  tee”  ef the
\nfamily and that in   palupatti and
\ndeclaration made. by  defendant befeme<\/p>\n
the Special”    Land Ceiiing is<\/p>\n
produced. It    t that she is the
\nclass I heir    ‘and she is entitle to
\n1\/ 6&1 share   ‘belonging to the said
\n   to the panchayath held,<\/p>\n
there were _p1’operb2es between the heir of the late<\/p>\n
garden by malizmg the pro\ufb01t them-on     <\/p>\n
share to the plaintiff, therefore she  :4;   T. { <\/p>\n
defendants 2 and 3 calling upon t1u%;m_ to aI1o}’.’v~’\u00a7’!?ke\u00a7:1f;V i\/6~j\u00a5* V<\/p>\n
share and to pay mcsnc pm\ufb01ts”V’\u00a73:{1\ufb01t.    ‘\u00a3111:
\ndefendants have not some   sh’2\u00a7f’Ae.V vIv”Icncc
\nshe filed the suit before    partition,
\nsepazate poss\u20ac:ss\u00a7ir;z”z;  pro\ufb01ts,
\ncosts etc. ‘  V . A ; ‘ ‘ ‘<\/p>\n
4.   {lac trial court the
\ndefendant. 1 “1   V T : 3 .’ \ufb01c\u00e9paratts written statement<\/p>\n
admit\ufb01ng theVVv’F::vlVa\u20ac:iQ1 1:=_1aip  the plaintiif, however the<\/p>\n
status _of;.:th\u00a2:jx’as__m\u00a2mber of joint ilamjiy is denied and<\/p>\n
 1i}3.\u00a2}’   ___th{: said earlier partition and disputed<\/p>\n
the”.  to be made in a panchayath, it is<\/p>\n
 vcr;;1tent\u00a34~;d..  declaration \ufb01ver} to the Special Deputy<\/p>\n
  Urban Land Cc1}1n’ ‘ g is only for maktm’ g it<\/p>\n
  the authorities the persons who are interested in<\/p>\n
‘j  and the same cannot be a founda\ufb01mtt for the<\/p>\n
faiaaua” fo dccmcing the suit. It is further contended that<\/p>\n
4,—1<\/p>\n
they have spent more than Rs. 50,000\/— out of  fa umT   A V’<\/p>\n
assets for the marriage of the p1ama\u00b0m~’I:hat    <\/p>\n
gxven” shelter at the time when her    ‘ 7.:\n<\/p>\n
it is further contended that agliit’
\nancestral property and they  cgf  by
\nSHI’ViVOI’Sh.ip and not by   contended
\nthat since then: hashpgn  joint male<\/p>\n
members of \ufb021c_Vfa:v     intcntnom to<\/p>\n
partition t}1\u00e9’%jbinf:ifam1?’AV’:;:V;;fV’pi\ufb021\u00a7\u00a2z’ti\u00a3\u00a7_”t\ufb01\u00a2 c1a1’m of the piaititz\ufb02
\nis premature: _. ‘H:cnor:_: VVtiv;’c*’;3′.  {of dismissal of the suit.\n<\/p>\n
5. ;x{ %’s}41pp\u00a7r:&   case of the p1ainti\ufb01’ she<\/p>\n
   and got marked Ex.P1 to 13. The<\/p>\n
 3 witnesses and have got marked<\/p>\n
  Ex.    court after considering the oral and<\/p>\n
   placed on record and after hearing’<\/p>\n
 ‘ th3:  deemed the suit mm: by the plainti\ufb01’<\/p>\n
  she is entitled to 1\/6* share in the SS? and<\/p>\n
 the defendants 2 to 3 to put the plaintiff in<\/p>\n
 \ufb01lxysical possession of the property marked as ‘F’ in Ex.P.4
\n.. ‘Q<\/p>\n
:2’.\n<\/p>\n
-‘ ;’_ -_o’,p7\/<\/p>\n
within 60 days \ufb01om the date of judgment  T’ <\/p>\n
plaititi\ufb01” was directed to pay additk\u00a7i1’\u00a71 ‘cc*ni*\u00a7  <\/p>\n
market value of the property.\n<\/p>\n
6. Being aggrieved the
\nup with this appeal mai1\u00a7ilf’*q;1    the
\ndeath of their father   appcllmts
\nconstitute   \u00a2  and that the
\nfcmalc mcsxxbcx\u00e9g   pmpcr\ufb01cs only at
\nthe time   of the co-\n<\/p>\n
Paibencrs,  #.\u00a7fi;:\ufb01t no.1-P1ai11ti\ufb01’ can not<\/p>\n
dcmand_,_nart1.  %\u00a2mc gins’  {fam;’1y pn:;pcr& s. it is further<\/p>\n
 3that’~-the  ‘based on a prior partition as such<\/p>\n
  %%:;g\u00a2\u00a2 been \ufb01led only for pmsession and not<\/p>\n
‘ VV   for  .TiiatT::thc suit is \ufb01led prior to coming into force<\/p>\n
  \ufb01mcn\u00e9mcnt Hindu Succession Act, therefore the<\/p>\n
  not entitled tr) 116*” share in the joint family<\/p>\n
  That when admittedly there is no m1:i111on by<\/p>\n
VV    and bounds the reliance placed on by the lower court<\/p>\n
 on the cariicr partition dots not arise. It is finthcr<\/p>\n
X . .::_(‘__4., Q<\/p>\n
of loose divisions may take piece, \u00ab
\nail the necessazy ingledieaxtsas laid
\nby law namely the de\ufb01:m’te,..iniena\u00a7on ‘to
\nseparate, the mxving out (if s}1.a:\ufb01es  the \u00ab. V’ ”
\nphysical division
\nseparating or handing over or” taking away  ‘
\nof that share. It is filefotality’-afTtI1ese5
\nfactors alone__ that  to~e..m\u00a2’
\nconelusion thafgparti\ufb01on   fact taken<\/p>\n
 at  V’ ‘I       ‘<\/p>\n
In the    SANKH vs
\nRAMcHANp3,\u00e9. fnean) BY HIS L.Rs
\nAN) oTHeRs’_g\u00a7x\u00a7:\u00a7’v.”:V9e9se :a7(g -the Apex Court has held<\/p>\n
; ‘V _ ‘It is now Well established that an
\n :a’gIeemezE1″L  all the ooparceners is
\n“;i:iotV’es_sen\ufb01a1 to the dismptiaon of the joint
\n ~ status, but 3 de\ufb01nite and
\nT’ \u00bb.1m\u00a7\u00a71nbiguous indication of intention by
\none”;-member to separate himmif fmm the
\n and to enjoy his share in severalty<\/p>\n
. Vwj\ufb02lvamoant in law to a division of status.\n<\/p>\n
‘ .I__t”is immaterial in such a case whether the
\nother members assent or not. Glam the
\nCIt'”:CiSi(3iI1 is unequivocally expressed, and
\nclearly intimated to his co–~sl3axers, the
\nright of the coparcener to obtain and
\npossess: the share to which he admittedly<\/p>\n
is entitled, is unimpeachahkg<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
If however the expxessionf-._:off. %
\nintention is a mere pxetenee or   ‘<\/p>\n
there is in the eye of lawfno eepala\ufb01son   L.\n<\/p>\n
the joint family status.’<\/p>\n
8. On the other hand vtheu   fo_:”VVVtfie VA<\/p>\n
Iespondent No, I argued that in  xthe .a1ueeI;1d3efent to
\nHindu Succession Act,   elf incereectness
\nin the order passedpy  aiici  prayed for
\ndismissal of       <\/p>\n
9.   for both the
\nparties   them\ufb01oint that arises for my<\/p>\n
consiiezatie\u00e9xyjs  and decree passed by<\/p>\n
the  :5″   perverse and capricious?\n<\/p>\n
‘  _   is no dispute between the<\/p>\n
 es reiationship, it is an admitted fact that the<\/p>\n
  appe\ufb02eem  Ajrespondexats are the children of Ian:\n<\/p>\n
~  and the deceased respondent No.1. The<\/p>\n
  of the appellant is that the plamt\ufb01fl respondent<\/p>\n
H   is not a q)-parcener and that the suit property being<\/p>\n
  ._ \u00a3E1eir ancestral pmpefty they became cwmers of the same by<\/p>\n
survivorship md not by inheritance, thus it is contended
\n 5″;\n<\/p>\n
~.. ___,\/\/4,<\/p>\n
, ‘\/<\/p>\n
that the plainti\ufb01–rcspondcnt no.1 herein,     b <\/p>\n
suit for partition in the absence ofgi:\n<\/p>\n
male members of the: joint  ma  %V<\/p>\n
entitled to sham only in respect   <\/p>\n
father and thus she is noi’:     of a<\/p>\n
male member. It is further   there is no<\/p>\n
partition bchvnez}   family and<\/p>\n
that they   the joint tlamily
\nproperties,  ‘fgrf  ‘as premature. To
\nappreciate    it is necessary to<\/p>\n
look into  Succession [ Amendment ]<\/p>\n
    as foikywsz<\/p>\n
     ‘*6; Devolution of intcmst in
\n‘ .,\u00a7:’Qpa1v.f;c;1a1y pmpcrty:– (I) On and from the
\nwmmenccment of the Himlu Succession
\n(Arzg\u00e9jadmcnt) Act, 2005 in a joint Hindu
\n governed by the Mitaksham law, the<\/p>\n
” _d_.\u00e9u1ghtaer ofa csopamener shall—\u00bb-\n<\/p>\n
(a) by birth bccomc a oopamcner
\nin hm’ awn right in the same
\nmanner as the son;\n<\/p>\n
(b) have the same rights in the
\ncoparcezaaxy pmpcrty as she
\nwould have bad if she had been
\na son;\n<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
(c) be subject to  ._
\nliabilities in
\ncoparcenaxy  5,3.  of I. .\n<\/p>\n
a son,<\/p>\n
and any xeztizzvcncc
\ncoparccincr shall be  tO~._i11<:iude';:a
\nreference to a \u00a71aughte_r_ qfa   <\/p>\n
– Provid\u00e9d t11a.4:   in
\nthis submkectit\u00e9n 1  or
\nH1-.va11dat\u20aca}~. .   d1.-zgggisnton or
\n..zr\u00abc\u00a71enat1sitio’1i”‘of property
\n   w1ii<:h_ hadj-1_;ai~:e_\ufb01 pL3cc.befo1~e the 20th
\n *day of<\/p>\n
I1.tvl1cVVi:.::.i$tz\u00a731t_:TVTt::i.-as admittedly thcrc is no<\/p>\n
partiizionin t\ufb01\u00e9' gafAa:;\u00a7pci1ants and rcspondcnts till day,<\/p>\n
  appclj\u00e911ts——~thcy had no intention to separate<\/p>\n
  at present. However DWJ and 2
\n    adxnitting the right of the plaizlti\ufb01"
\n cvgr   and in fact he deposed that they are
\n   a share to plain\ufb01\ufb01 in the share of their father<\/p>\n
I\u00bb  'bi1t' ag  was cxprcssctd by the appellants in their cvidcnec<\/p>\n
T  the partitrian is c\ufb01bctuw thc plaintiff will sell away her<\/p>\n
 gham, but there is no bona\ufb01cics in time said contention of the<\/p>\n
1"':\n<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
counsel for the appellants and the gaxnc is” he ”\n<\/p>\n
xejectecl.\n<\/p>\n
12. However there: is no   #3
\nto the declaration .. bcfoi”cVi..tI:ii\u20ac-\u00bb
\nCommissioner for Urban   so also
\nthe palupatti and ggkctch  ‘a.i,a.;1    with the
\nsame, but   dcxmmcnts
\nare oniy  upon and that the
\nposscssioi; of  with the appellants<\/p>\n
even till   = appellants, it is only for<\/p>\n
making_ git’  tcf\ufb01hc vi.-authorities the persons who are<\/p>\n
   property and the same cannot be a<\/p>\n
foViinVcViai\ufb01{\u00a7\ufb01”:V4ii::bV_  plaintiif for dccrccing the suit. Even<\/p>\n
  tgfj  respondent No.1, she was not put<\/p>\n
”  of the dcmarcatad Qropcrty and that the<\/p>\n
A  were not givzizzg any share to her in the pm\ufb01m<\/p>\n
  “th;crt\u20ac:f3n. Fm-m the mal and docmncntary evidence placed on<\/p>\n
  ~zv:\u00a7cord it is clear that than: was an arrmgcmcnt between tht:\n<\/p>\n
” members of the family to paztitian bat they failed to act up<\/p>\n
4,”:\n<\/p>\n
.;-,2 _\/.\n<\/p>\n
\u00a7’.=_  ‘\/r”\n<\/p>\n
i ‘- \/- H
\n2,; \/ ‘>
\n__ “\/\/ .\n<\/p>\n
4._}jI’cSt3I2t\u00ab1:i:\u00a7Cl’f:2 suit.\n<\/p>\n
01:). it, as such in View of the dccizsions   thc: ”\n<\/p>\n
counsel for the appc\ufb02ant, referred xi \\ <\/p>\n
that then: is no partition by meats ancfhcliunds   V<\/p>\n
sf appellants and respondents  ‘l’i11\u00a3s2-.Ht’iw
\nanxendmerzt to the Hindu, Szlgccgsi\u00e9\ufb01  of
\nSection 6 of the Act, the    status of a
\ncopawcncr and  got   of the
\nfamily pmpcr\ufb01c\u00e9  share among other
\n  schedule property.\n<\/p>\n
Thus th\ufb01 :;\u00a7e;it’pf  herein seeking for
\npartition is  plaintiff has every right to
\n   jthe trial court witlwut ovnsidcring thc<\/p>\n
 i\ufb01zat’ is no partition in the f33m11y’ of<\/p>\n
V Vvagpclla\ufb01fs  fcspondcnts til] day by mates and bounds,<\/p>\n
” __thc ‘”s.uit of the p1aint:i\ufb01’, directing the appcllazuts to<\/p>\n
    in possession ofthc portion marked as ‘F’ in<\/p>\n
  which is inecmect and illegal and the same is liable<\/p>\n
 Vbc set aside: and the judgment and dccmc passed by thc<\/p>\n
\/Y
\n5 .”‘=
\n.><\/p>\n
max Court is to be mocmcd. The rest ofthc \ufb01mdiags  _<\/p>\n
by the trial Court with regard to additional  * ~ <\/p>\n
by the respondent No.1 \/ plaintiff    ‘<\/p>\n
the same does not require any V <\/p>\n
14. For the aforesaid   this
\nappeal is allowed in ._   dated
\n7\u00bb-3-saws passed by the   1986 is
\nhereby mod\ufb01od  it    \u00abtiae\u00e9\ufb01zainm is entitled
\nto pmtition   schedule property.\n<\/p>\n
  the parties, there is
\nno #0   ” ‘ .\n<\/p>\n
I}rav\u00a7 (1acrcc.A V   , a\ufb01cr payment of adeimo11a’ ‘ 1<\/p>\n
 \u00ab. \ufb01ffacg  the  xcspondcnt no. 1 hcncin.\n<\/p>\n
sal-\n<\/p>\n
Judge<\/p>\n
09<\/span><\/p>\n
1:123 share erf the \u00e9eccased as per the said Will.
\niiuzing fh\ufb01 1;\u00a5\u20ac1′}.dCI1C}=’ Of this appeal {I116
\ndisclosed about executiorx of Q16?  Q16
\nFurther this ceurt exercismg  ‘
\ncannet accept the will if any  j::1*g\u00a7t:;af,. .t\ufb013i’1E3’I”$fC3i:’\u00e93, if
\nany W251 has been \u20acxecui<%{:i"'1L\u00a7\u00a7{r–it; favour of
\nrespondent :1o l, th<%:\u00a7z;"rs:.s*.p:31:1tI\u00a3\u00e9r1**c:\u00a7::1 1%) "I;igh.t under
\nthe W21} by    the
\ncontention    regard cannot be
\nacceptzizd.  1 regarding payment of
\nadditional {3:1Av{1\u00a3".t I"\u00ab:%c   if the respczn\u00e9cntw-1 has
\nalmady  _  fee he nczc\u00e9d not pay' any
\n    """\n<\/p>\n
   the LA. is disposed cf.\n<\/p>\n
Sci\/’:{__
\nJudge<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court M Narayana vs Smt Ramakka on 21 July, 2008 Author: K.Ramanna IN THE HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT’ BANi%;;\u00a7mf:_R\u00a3: ‘% DATED THIS THE 22″ DAY &;%z:.:,v,%\u00ab2.m_% I $*$E:\u00a7E*'(}\u00a3=5.lfZ -Tm \u00a7\u00ab\u00a70N’I%L\u00a7f. MR,.J{:’\u00a7T\u00a7%::\u20ac K ?\u00e9A~M\ufb01F’m”25 EE{_.3\u00a5~{JZA\u00a7? F}1??;’3″:3K%_:”39I%?\u00bb4\u00a7;?\u00a7; 593:, W53\/.2:}::.’:–.. BEWWEEN: I < AN\u00a5): ' M i"-farayaua. _ – 8\/0 33116 A ' = 71 […]<\/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-81531","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM Narayana vs Smt Ramakka on 21 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M Narayana vs Smt Ramakka on 21 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-07-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-11-15T09:49:19+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=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M Narayana vs Smt Ramakka on 21 July, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-15T09:49:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1893,\"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\\\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008\",\"name\":\"M Narayana vs Smt Ramakka on 21 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-15T09:49:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M Narayana vs Smt Ramakka on 21 July, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"M Narayana vs Smt Ramakka on 21 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M Narayana vs Smt Ramakka on 21 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-07-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-11-15T09:49:19+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":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M Narayana vs Smt Ramakka on 21 July, 2008","datePublished":"2008-07-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-15T09:49:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008"},"wordCount":1893,"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\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008","name":"M Narayana vs Smt Ramakka on 21 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-07-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-15T09:49:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-narayana-vs-smt-ramakka-on-21-july-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M Narayana vs Smt Ramakka on 21 July, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/81531","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=81531"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/81531\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=81531"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=81531"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=81531"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}