{"id":90258,"date":"2010-12-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-11-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010"},"modified":"2018-06-16T14:10:45","modified_gmt":"2018-06-16T08:40:45","slug":"sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010","title":{"rendered":"Sri N R Balakrishna S\/O Late N M … vs Sri N R Shivakumar S\/O Late N M … on 1 December, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri N R Balakrishna S\/O Late N M … vs Sri N R Shivakumar S\/O Late N M … on 1 December, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Subhash B.Adi<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE I  DAY OF DECEMBER 2010\n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HONBLE MRJUSTICE SUBHASH  V\n\nREGULAR FIRST APPEAL N0.2559\/2E(\u00a7'06:Aa.R.: '7  .\n\nBETWEEN:\n\nSri.N.R.Balakrishr1a\n\nAged about 66 years\n\nS\/ o Late N.M.Ramaswamy\nResiding at No.6-383, 2\"\" Cross\n1%\" Main Road, BEML Layout\n5111 Phase, 2\"' Stage, A \n\nRajarajeshwarinagar, _a   _   \" ,\n\nBangalorew 560     *  __ APPELLANT\n[By Sri.R. Nataraj   } A\n\nAND\n\n1 . Sri. ' N.R.Sh'ivVak1jmar.__ \"  \n\nAged 'abpu,t 56 year':-, \n\nAS\/0 Late N.MV..Rarr1as\\3vamy\n\n.. \u00abER\/a\"~No.532,~--.32\"d Cross,\n - 11E_\"'v.MaiI'l, 43\" BRIOCK, J ayanagar\nV .. _ Ba11galo1\"e,w 560 011.\n\n2.. A\" --._VSri'.'NI_i2,_Rar1oachanra\n'  Aged. ab-{nut 64 years\n4\"' S \/ o late. N .M.Ran'1aswamy\nR\/a\u00b0No.6\/6, 15* Floor,\n\nA n  41?*\"Cross, 7\"' Block west.\n\n_ \"Jayanagar\n' ' \"Bangalore ~w 560 082.\n\nA \"   Sri. N. R.Venkaiesh\n\nAged about 62 years\nS \/ 0 Late N.M.Ramaswamy\n\n\n\nM)\n\nR\/at No.4. Nirvana Apartment,\nNo.l42, ET] Colony, Kathriguppe\nBaI1galore-- 82.\n\n4. Sri.N.R.Anand\n\nAged about 60 years\n\nS \/ 0 Late. N.M.Ramaswar11y\nR\/a No.446\/2, 6'?! Cross.\n7\"' Block, Jayanagar\nBangalore --- 560 082.\n\n5. Sri.Prakash   ._\n\nAged about 54 years I\n\nS\/o Late N.M.Ramaswar:1y\n\nR\/at N0.304, Ka1'1akapura.R0ad.l'\n7*\" Block, Jayanagar, 'C \"\nBangalore -- 560 082.\n\n6. Sn'.N.R.Jaishanka,1\"\" \n\nAged about 52 years.  _ _  3\nS\/o Late. N.M.Rarnaswam_\\f\u00bb\"' \nR\/a No.41, 1.5' A--Cr,r3-ss..  V *\nHanumaI1ih'a_11a.gar; _ \nBangalore\ufb01  0.1 9.. 1 \n\n7. Sm.t.C.howdart1r;1a  \n\nAged a'bout'81year's~ \" \n\nW\/ 0 Later. N. M .RamaSVv*amy\n\nR\/at No\":304,. R;ana_ka}5ura Road\n\n_f7l?i Block, \"J-ayaztagaz',\ni3a33.galore we 566982. .. RESPONDENTS\n\n'(By slims\u00bbjfe}i};g1t;1kr:shna, Adv. for R-1\n\nSri. 1\\1.,'J.P*or\u00a7'na.(:~h'2i, Adv. for R-2, R5 & R7\nSri.'S.l\\lagva,raj;-.V_Ad\\r. for R-4; R3 served}\n\n3 so ; 'E'his Regular First Appeal is filed 11fl(l\u20acf' Section 96 of CPC\n\n \"against. the judgment and decree dt..6.7.2006 passed in\n\ns.OS.N0;'494O\/2000 on the file of the VIII Addl. City Civil Judge,\n\n___\"\"Banga1ore City [CCI\"I~15] deereeing the suit for permanent\nC * inj--ur1ct.ion.\n\n\n\nThis Appeal coming on for orders this day. the Court\ndelivered following:\n\nJ U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
This is an appeal by the first defendant against the<\/p>\n
judgmeitt and decree in O.S.No.4940\/ 2000 dated 69*<\/p>\n
on the file of VIII Addl.City Civil Judge, Bangalore_.uCity;ll’.   ‘<\/p>\n
2. Parties would be referred tojasl per &_ti1peir\u00abranfking’-in <\/p>\n
trial court.\n<\/p>\n
3. First respondent is the p._l:ai~2:itif’1″. fiie  a ‘decree’<\/p>\n
of permanent injunction restrainiiig\ufb02-.the defendants from
\ninterfering with the peaceful;possesvsiolnland enjoyment of the
\nsuit schedule property by:’hli’n1′.\ufb02<\/p>\n
4~.l’.Case   that, plaintiff and defendant<\/p>\n
Nos} to 6 “are  of_.’etone N.M.Ramaswamy. Defendant<\/p>\n
 No.7   widoweof  N,1\\\/1′,Ra:na.swamyx N.M.Ran1aswarny<\/p>\n
 h_ilS:l.lif:\u00a7’Al.g-jme had acquired the suit schedule property.<\/p>\n
V'(ie’f_ai_sel,i’plaintiff and defendants have succeeded to his<\/p>\n
V if _ estateas !,_egal:heirs. The plaintiff and defendants have got equal<\/p>\n
share. Fi’rst defendant on the ilbadviee of certain persons, who<\/p>\n
a.arell”–in’in1ical1y disposed against the plaintiff and other<\/p>\n
ljltdefendetnts filed a suit in O.S.No.5-425\/1996 seeking partition<\/p>\n
”  and separate possession of various items of the properties left<\/p>\n
behind by their father N.M.Ra1naswaniy, however, on the
\nintervention of we11~wishers and the friends, defendant No.1 was
\nconvinced and accordingly, he withdrew the suit by filing an
\napplication under Section 151 of CPC dated ll.2.19E3:jf’alyyl1e1*ein<\/p>\n
the<\/p>\n
he stated that t.he matter is amicably settled\u00a7:”~–Qiftelifi<\/p>\n
withdrawal of the suit, plaintiff and defendantsyyorfallypart\u00e9itionedppV <\/p>\n
the properties left behind by    if<\/p>\n
possession of their respective share.   l9:97,:’plaint;iff”<\/p>\n
defendants reduced the terms of””t’he.oral pa.rtition   family
\nsettlement and they also”~confirrnedVt.:ltt1le’c-oral partition entered
\ninto amongst thernselvesl   have taken<\/p>\n
possession of respective shareggi: The..’Va:cant’site bearing No.532,<\/p>\n
32″”  Block, Bangalore belongs
\nto their father Vlate”l$t;M.P.ainaswamy. He had permitted the<\/p>\n
plaintiff to put tip’ residential construction and plaintiff had<\/p>\n
‘l”p_ot tipl’:*co-ns’t1fuction:’to'”the knowledge of the other defendants.<\/p>\n
.l’–Pplainti’ffAh’adtivncitmjed cost of ?’ 7200.000\/~. Thus, in View of the<\/p>\n
SElI”l'”1~\u20ac’,”t1I’1(ZlEtI”‘i;,[fiE;:’tCI’1’I1S of the family settlement, option was given<\/p>\n
 . to the ‘plaintiff to retain that property by paying the value of the
\n  “s.hare1’s. PlaiI1tiff has discharged the payment in terms of
\n._,f.’thAe’\u00a7settlen1ent to each of the defendants. Despite the same,<\/p>\n
“‘._defe11ctant,s are trying to interfere with the possession. He also<\/p>\n
1<\/span><\/p>\n
alleged that, he has been paying property tax and is In exclusive<\/p>\n
possession of the suit schedule property.\n<\/p>\n
5. Said suit was contested by the first. defendant. who filed<\/p>\n
written statement mteraita adrnitting that he had filedfearlier<\/p>\n
suit and he had withdrawn the sanie. He also _a”d’niift’te_d’\ufb01lial,<\/p>\n
there is a family settlement on 26.5.1997, hoiweyerl  ._den1′”e-do <\/p>\n
the con\ufb01rmation of the oral pa1’ti’-;:i01’1.b_:ylylE,le:_denied, ‘<\/p>\n
plaintiff was permitted to construct a r’esid~ential.huildingl’on’iihe -‘<\/p>\n
suit schedule property. He alsodeiiied that_  has spent
\n? 100,000\/-. Since the faniily’.’settlernen’t._ is nolgwen effect to,
\nall the Inenibers of the family’ in’Vc:ll1din.g_ffVthfe~defendant No.1 are<\/p>\n
deemed to be schedule property.\n<\/p>\n
Plaintifflv’ean*not.ollaifn ownership over the said property<\/p>\n
unless the settlernlentlldeedldated 26.5.1997 is fully given effect<\/p>\n
 to and_\u00a7:ftillrr.all the parties perform their part of obligation under<\/p>\n
 thel.settle’rnent;\u00ab–._He admitted that. each of the defendants were<\/p>\n
eiititledf V’tolll”_g;\u00a7vetll.f\u00a7’v”.2,14,300\/– towards their share. However,<\/p>\n
V V’ _ defendant”No.:l is entitled to entire sum ol” 3′ l5,00,000\/– as per<\/p>\n
tflause  the l\\\/lemorandurn of Family Settlement. He also<\/p>\n
  that, plaintiffmay be in possession of the suit schedule<\/p>\n
  propeity with his family from 1991 and may be paying the tax,<\/p>\n
“lhoweve1′, contended that, till the terms of the settlernent are<\/p>\n
w\ufb01m<\/p>\n
given effect to, plaintiff cannot claim exclusive title or restrain
\nthe defendants from eiijoying the suit property. Further stated
\nthat. he is entitled for ? 3150.000\/– as his share in the family
\nproperties. The fomlula. for payment of this amount also<\/p>\n
contained in the settlement. As per Clause 6 of <\/p>\n
share of the defeiidant was estimated at ? alaiid’
\nliability to be borne by this d\u20acf\u20acI}daI1f.;  Plaiiitiff T. V<\/p>\n
as well as defendant Nos.2 to 7 h4aye”.agreed_jto’vtend.’ei=.fthe<\/p>\n
aforesaid sum of 3 31,50,000\/– priority basis lolnlsale
\nalienation or disposal of the propel .llit”waslthe duty of
\nthe plaintiff and defendant.’    -comply with the<\/p>\n
settlement in itsytrue   V’ Plaintiff has not even<\/p>\n
T botheredllltol  3  ? 2′.–.l.ll\u00a5il,3O0\/M, let alone paying ?<\/p>\n
31,50,0ot:;\/\u00a7.<- V<\/p>\n
.6. Defei1\u00e9fE11\u00ab"..'L.h.'–No_s.l.'2',: 3, 5 and 7 also filed written<\/p>\n
 _ Ialowex\/'ler;""defendant Nos.4 and 6 seriously contested<\/p>\n
 Tst1it."'–v.y_l'he'yy:Vc1–enied the settlement and denied right of the<\/p>\n
plairitifl'. _l p  i " l<\/p>\n
7;'  the basis of the above pieadirlgs, the trial court<\/p>\n
 four issues as under: r<\/p>\n
suit schedule property. He relied on EXPI M settlement deed
\nand submitted that, under settlement. deed, defendant No.1 is
\nentitled for ? 31,50,000\/\u00bb towards his share and as long as that
\namount: is not paid, it cannot" be treated as settleznentas'given
\neffect to and as long as settlement is not given
\nof granting injunction in favour of plaintiff lbiligl
\nalso relied on the evidence of PW-1     '
\nnot been paid and in View otfthe  as jag
\nexistence of status of joint farniigtg'\u00bbi.ntention'to:  other
\nmembers is not maintainable. aldeeision of the
\nApex Court reported in  in the matter of<\/p>\n
SAKHAHARI Pam\/A.rRziio \u20acKi'qRlq;H\u00a3a\u00a5a'E. ANOTHER mus-<\/p>\n
BHIMASVH2tit.tKAR,  KARALHE. He also reiied on
\nanother jludgrnent of :_tl1_e"Ape\u00abx*'C0urt reported in 2004(4) KCCR<\/p>\n
2145 in _ the lr'I1attew:'_ of i"~:.G:'sHIvALINGAPPA (DECEASED) BY LRS<\/p>\n
 " ~\/iNi:)~.mps- d.s;i\u00ab:sWARAPPA AND OTHERS and submitted<\/p>\n
..4'th_e"'.set,tlement deed is reduced in writing and<\/p>\n
registered,' piteiliyvilll not carry any evidentiaiy value. On these<\/p>\n
"\u00ab,__."'.'\u20ac\u00a7t1bmiSSi(ltgS, he sought for setting aside the judgment of the<\/p>\n
trial eotirt-\n<\/p>\n
10. in the light of the above contention, the point that<\/p>\n
I<\/p>\n
‘”,arises for consideration is as under:\n<\/p>\n
-9-<\/span><\/p>\n
Whether the plairtitffhas made out at casefor grant” of<\/p>\n
decree ofpermanent in_jtl.nctton?\n<\/p>\n
1 1. There is no dispute that the plaintiff and defendant
\nNos} to 6 are the children of defendant No.7. It is alsonot in<\/p>\n
dispute that, the suit schedule property and other are<\/p>\n
acquired by late N.M.Ran1aswarny, husband defendant
\nFirst defendant has not denied  he  -:l’ile:Cl’-_a_ls’uit “in if<\/p>\n
O.S.No.5425\/1996 for partition andllselparate .p_oslses’siloi:l{_~.._l’He<\/p>\n
has also not denied that th6l”‘=\u00a7’aid suit .W’aS:.’.=\\trifl1ldrawl’l
\namicably settled. He has nott”‘denied'<_t.hat thee plaintiff and
\ndefendant Nos.1 to 7 ent_ered…l5into__:l\ufb01settlement deed on<\/p>\n
26.5.1997. In_ _ple.fitdillg_;'V:l:heA'*~ad.mit.s";\u00abt'hat, plaintiff is in<\/p>\n
possession of in 1991, though he has denied
\nthe collstruetiotn lal.1eged  been made by the plaintiff and<\/p>\n
amount 'spent lby Athelplaitltifl". Defendants claim that, as long as<\/p>\n
 of17settlerne'l1tindeed are fully given effect to, it cannot<\/p>\n
lpartalte' thei.ehara.eter of severance of status of joint family and<\/p>\n
as long  ~thatAlis not done, plaintifl' is not entitled for grant of<\/p>\n
 ~  decree ofi__njunetio1l. "\n<\/p>\n
    It is pertinent to note that, defendant No.1, plaintiff
\nif   other defendants have not disputed the settlemeilt. lt is also<\/p>\n
\u00abshot in dispute that, the parties have reduced into writing the<\/p>\n
E<\/p>\n
J<\/p>\n
~l()~<\/p>\n
deed called settlement of properties and all of them have signed<\/p>\n
the deed. Clause 2 of the deed gives an option to the plaintiff to<\/p>\n
{retain the suit schedule property subject to paying to market<\/p>\n
value as stated therein. Allegation of the defendant Nvojilisypthat,
\nthe amount due from the plairtt.it’f is not paid <\/p>\n
totally due under the settlement deed is also  I.<\/p>\n
13. Insofar as suit property is=.,1conc.er:neel,.ld,efendant<\/p>\n
is liable to pay ? 22,14,300\/~ to defendant’ .l\\los.e2,l’   and <\/p>\n
and other defendants have to  –  defendant
\nNo.1. No doubt, if the’t.er’ms -of “S_\u00a73\u20ac,itlf’err1ent require certain
\npayments are to be  tei’1ns~:l._’9f.l~~mat, parties are<\/p>\n
required to corf1plf,j.,.,=withl–.their re’spe’etive.sobligations, however,<\/p>\n
this is not a ‘s1,1itV’forAAdeclaration’ of title and also not a suit for<\/p>\n
artition, ‘lair”it.iff only ‘sou ht for decree of errnanent
\nP P  _ , y  3 P<\/p>\n
_ injurmftiorit. It   dispute that, the plaintiff is also a heir of
\n  There is no dispute that the defendant No.1
\n but did not choose to enter the<\/p>\n
 _ witness h’ojt,.lA\u00ab:however, has cross–e:-tarnined the plaintiff. When
\n ‘  paltieslhave admitted that the plaintiff is in possession, even
\n  that the terms of the settlernertt are not given effect to,
\n   does not confer any right on t.he defendaI3.t.s to interfere with<\/p>\n
~ the possession, which is otzherwise lawful, they may be entitled<\/p>\n
\u00a33<\/p>\n
wt<\/p>\n
for relief in terms of the seit.lement. but as the defendants
\nhaving adxnitted that the plaintiff is in possession and his
\npossession is Lmlawi’ul_ I find that the trial court only on<\/p>\n
appreciation of these material evidence has found the<\/p>\n
plaintiff is in possession, the said \ufb01nding is  <\/p>\n
evidence. There is no reason to interfere with ‘tiie.udgn1ei1i. and <\/p>\n
decree of the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n
14. It is also submitted,__by thel”learne’ti’xACoun_selll for;<\/p>\n
defendant No.1 that. the suitlllis_lll’pending-  partition and
\nseparate possession. If is so,  always open to the parties
\nto work out all other reprnedielsl iari-s~ing’l{_’between them and<\/p>\n
granting of dec;”ee”\u00abTol.”pefmainent  will not in any way<\/p>\n
prejudice “ll \ufb01nd that the judgment and
\ndecree of tleieltrial  and proper and does not call for<\/p>\n
 interfe\u00a7reli1C.e.  I pass the following”:\n<\/p>\n
i ll 1  ll 0 R D E R<\/p>\n
 ._  \u00e9ip.pea:l’*fails and same is dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri N R Balakrishna S\/O Late N M … vs Sri N R Shivakumar S\/O Late N M … on 1 December, 2010 Author: Subhash B.Adi IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE I DAY OF DECEMBER 2010 BEFORE THE HONBLE MRJUSTICE SUBHASH V REGULAR FIRST APPEAL N0.2559\/2E(\u00a7’06:Aa.R.: […]<\/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-90258","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri N R Balakrishna S\/O Late N M ... vs Sri N R Shivakumar S\/O Late N M ... on 1 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\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri N R Balakrishna S\/O Late N M ... vs Sri N R Shivakumar S\/O Late N M ... on 1 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-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=\"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-16T08:40:45+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\\\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri N R Balakrishna S\\\/O Late N M … vs Sri N R Shivakumar S\\\/O Late N M … on 1 December, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-16T08:40:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1730,\"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\\\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010\",\"name\":\"Sri N R Balakrishna S\\\/O Late N M ... vs Sri N R Shivakumar S\\\/O Late N M ... on 1 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-16T08:40:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri N R Balakrishna S\\\/O Late N M … vs Sri N R Shivakumar S\\\/O Late N M … on 1 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":"Sri N R Balakrishna S\/O Late N M ... vs Sri N R Shivakumar S\/O Late N M ... on 1 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\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri N R Balakrishna S\/O Late N M ... vs Sri N R Shivakumar S\/O Late N M ... on 1 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-16T08:40:45+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\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri N R Balakrishna S\/O Late N M … vs Sri N R Shivakumar S\/O Late N M … on 1 December, 2010","datePublished":"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-16T08:40:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010"},"wordCount":1730,"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\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010","name":"Sri N R Balakrishna S\/O Late N M ... vs Sri N R Shivakumar S\/O Late N M ... on 1 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-16T08:40:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-n-r-balakrishna-so-late-n-m-vs-sri-n-r-shivakumar-so-late-n-m-on-1-december-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri N R Balakrishna S\/O Late N M … vs Sri N R Shivakumar S\/O Late N M … on 1 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\/90258","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=90258"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/90258\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=90258"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=90258"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=90258"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}