Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 29592 (KAR)

SRI K KRISHNA MURTHY v. SRI KESHAVA

RFA/439/2006 · 2025-02-28

H P Sandesh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8878 RFA No. 439 of 2006 C/W RFA No. 425 of 2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 439 OF 2006 (PAR) C/W REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 425 OF 2006 (PAR) IN RFA NO. 439/2006: BETWEEN: 1. 1(a) SRI. K. KRISHNA MURTHY S/O M. KATAPPA No.18, 1-A MAIN, NANJAPPA BLOCK, ADUGODI, BENGALURU. SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS SMT. PUSHPA W/O LATE K. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 1(b) SMT. MONICA K., D/O LATE K. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 1(c) SMT. THEJASWINI K., D/O LATE K. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS 1(d) SRI. MURALIDHARA K., S/O LATE K. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8878 RFA No. 439 of 2006 C/W RFA No. 425 of 2006 ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.5, 2ND CROSS, 2ND MAIN NEAR KATERAMMA TEMPLE SARASWATHIPURAM, HALASURU BENGALURU-560 008. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. P.B. RAJU, ADVOCATE FOR LRS OF DECEASED APPELLATS) AND: 1. 1(a) SRI. KESHAVA S/O MANICKAPPA NO.159, SHAMANNA GOWDA LAYOUT CHANNEL ROAD, BENGALURU. SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS SMT. AMBUJA W/O LATE M. KESHAVA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 1(b) SMT. KAVITHA D/O LATE M. KESHAVA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 1(c) SRI. MAHESH K., S/O LATE M. KESHAVA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 1(d) SRI. NATARAJ K., S/O LATE M. KESHAVA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS 1(e) SMT. GIRIJA D/O LATE M. KESHAVA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8878 RFA No. 439 of 2006 C/W RFA No. 425 of 2006 ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.159, 1ST MAIN ROAD SHAMANNA GOWDA LAYOUT MAIN CHANNEL ROAD, HALASURU BENGALURU-560 008. (AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 09.06.2021) 2. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE SRI. KRISHNAPPA SARAWATHIPURAM 2ND CROSS, ULSOOR, BENGALURU -560 008. 3. SRI. THIMMARAYAPPA S/O SRI MANICKAPPA DOOR NO.74, SARASWATHIPURAM 2ND CROSS, ULSOOR, BENGALURU-560008. 4. SRI BALAKRISHNA NO.147/2, SARASWATHIPURAM 2ND CROSS, ULSOOR, BENGALURU-560008. 5. SRI. VENUGOPAL NO.146, SARASWATHIPURAM 2ND CROSS, ULSOOR, BENGALURU-560008. 6. SRI. MOTAPPA NO.150, SARASWATHIPURAM 2ND CROSS, ULSOOR, BENGALURU-560008. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8878 RFA No. 439 of 2006 C/W RFA No. 425 of 2006 7. SRI. KATAPPA S/O SRI MANICKAPPA NO.151, SARASWATHIPURAM, 2ND CROSS, ULSOOR, BENGALURU-560008. 8. SRI. PURUSHOTHAN R/AT NO. 151, SARASWATHIPURAM 2ND CROSS, ULSOOR BENGALURU – 560 008. 9. 9(a) SMT. GOWRAMMA W/O NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS HOSKOTE TOWN BENGALURU DISTRICT SINCE DEAD BY HER LR'S SRI. RAVI S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.137 SARASWATHIPURAM 2ND CROSS, ULSOOR BENGALURU – 560 008. (AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 10.10.2023) 10. SMT. SARASWATHAMMA W/O GOPAL AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT NO.76, 2ND CROSS, 2ND MAIN SARASWATHIPURAM, ULSOOR BENGALURU-560 008. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VASANTHA SHETTY M., ADVOCATE FOR R8 AND R10; SRI. G. MANIVANNAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1(a) TO R1(e); R2 – SERVED APPEAL DISMISSED AS AGAINST R3 TO R7 VIDE ORDER DATED 31.03.2010; R9(a) - SERVED) - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8878 RFA No. 439 of 2006 C/W RFA No. 425 of 2006 THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 03.11.2005 PASSED IN O.S.NO.2607/1994 ON THE FILE OF THE XVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH.NO.32), PARTLY DECREEING HE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION. IN RFA NO. 425/2006: BETWEEN: 1.. 1(a) SRI. KESHAVA S/O MANICKAPPA NO.159, MAIN CHANNEL ROAD SHAMANNA GOWDA LAYOUT HALASOORU, BENGALURU NORTH BENGALURU-560 008. SINCE DECEASED BY LRS SMT. AMBUJA W/O LATE KESHAVA M. AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 1(b) SMT. KAVITHA D/O LATE KESHAVA M. AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS 1(c) SRI. MAHESH KUMAR K., S/O LATE KESHAVA M. AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 1(d) SRI. NATARAJ KUMAR K., S/O LATE KESHAVA M. AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS 1(e) SMT. GIRIJA D/O LATE M. KESHAVA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8878 RFA No. 439 of 2006 C/W RFA No. 425 of 2006 ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.159, MAIN CHANNEL ROAD SHAMANNA GOWDA LAYOUT HALASOOR, BENGALURU NORTH BENGALURU-560 008. (AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 25.07.2023) ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. G. MANIVANNAN, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT NOS.1(a) TO 1(e)) AND: 1. 1(a) SRI. K. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O M. KATAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS SMT. PUSHPA W/O LATE K. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 1(b) SMT. MONICA K., D/O LATE K. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 1(c) SMT. THEJASWINI K., D/O LATE K. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS 1(d) SRI. MURALIDHARA K., S/O LATE K. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.5, 2ND CROSS, 2ND MAIN NEAR KATERAMMA TEMPLE SARASWATHIPURAM, HALASURU BENGALURU-560 008. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:8878 RFA No. 439 of 2006 C/W RFA No. 425 of 2006 (AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 10.10.2023) 2. LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE KRISHNAPPA 2ND CROSS SARASWATHIPURAM ULSOOR BENGALURU-560008 3. THIMMARAYAPPA S/O MANICKAPPA DOOR NO.74, 2ND CROSS, SARASWATHIPURAM ULSOOR BENGALURU-560008 4. BALAKRISHNA NO.147/2, 2ND CROSS, SARASWATHIPURA ULSOOR BENGALURU-560008 5. VENUGOPAL NO.146, 2ND CROSS, SARASWATHIPURA ULSOOR BENGALURU-560008 6. MOTAPPA NO.150, 2ND CROSS, SARASWATHIPURA ULSOOR BENGALURU-560008 7. KATAPPA S/O MANICKAPPA NO.151, 2ND CROSS, SARASWATHIPURA ULSOOR BENGALURU-560008 - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:8878 RFA No. 439 of 2006 C/W RFA No. 425 of 2006 8. PURUSHOTHAM NO.147/2, 2ND CROSS, SARASWATHIPURA ULSOOR BENGALURU-560008 9. 9(a) GOWRAMMA W/O NARAYANAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY LRS RAVI S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/AT NO.137, 1 CROSS, 2ND MAIN, SARASWATHIPURAM ULSOOR, BENGALURU – 560 008. (AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 13.02.2024) 10. SARASWATHAMMA W/O GOPAL, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS NO.76, 2ND CROSS, 2ND MAIN, SARASWATHIPURAM BENGALURU-560008 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. P.B.RAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R1(a) TO (d); R2 – SERVED; R4 – SERVED; R7 – R8 AND R10 – SERVED APPEAL DISMISSED AGAINST R3, R5 AND R6 VIDE ORDER DATED 23.03.2010) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 3.11.2005, IN O.S.NO.2607/1994 ON THE FILE OF THE XVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH.NO. 32), PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:8878 RFA No. 439 of 2006 C/W RFA No. 425 of 2006 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent in R.F.A.No.439/2006 and also the counsel for the appellant R.F.A.No.425/2006 and also counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1(A-D) and counsel for respondent No.8 and 10 is absent. This Court made it clear in the previous occasion itself if counsel does not appear on the next date of hearing, matter will be heard in his absence. Hence, taken as no arguments of respondent Nos.8 and 10. 2. The challenge made in R.F.A.No.439/2006 by the appellant praying this Court to set-aside the judgment and decree dated 03.11.2005 passed by the Trial Court and he pleased to decree the suit and having perused the judgment passed in O.S.No.2607/1994. The suit was partly decreed, the Plaintiff shall be entitled for partition and separate possession of his 1/10th share out of plaint – - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:8878 RFA No. 439 of 2006 C/W RFA No. 425 of 2006 E schedule property excluding the portion purchased by the first defendant on 20.12.1979 under the sale deed Ex.D6. 3. Now, the counsel for appellant in R.F.A.No.439/2006 filed memo stating that the appeal in so far as it related to disallowing the claim in respect of suit ‘E’ schedule property Site No.5 which relates to the alienation made by Muniyamma during her lifetime. The appellant accept the finding of the Trial Court and in the memo says that not pressing their appeal and their appeal be dismissed as being without merits. In view of the memo filed by the appellant in R.F.A.No.439/2006 and also accepts the finding of the Trial Court, does not requires any consideration of this appeal. 4. The respondent Nos.1(A-D) who are the appellants in R.F.A.No.439/2006 also in the memo submits that the appeal filed by the respondents wherein sought for the relief to set-aside the finding of the Trial Court that Muniyamma had no right to settle the property in favour - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:8878 RFA No. 439 of 2006 C/W RFA No. 425 of 2006 her son Keshava. The respondents have produced Ex.D1 – the settlement deed and admits that the settlement deed is witnessed by the uncle of the original plaintiff and the settlement deed was not challenged by any of the children of late Sri.Manikappa or their legal heirs. Therefore, there is an admission that Smt.Muniyamma had valid title to execute the settlement deed. Accordingly, the appellant do not press their defense which have taken in the suit and they have no objection for setting aside the finding of the Trial Court, holding that Muniyamma had no right to execute the settlement deed. The respondents state that the original plaintiff’s sisters have expressed that they have no claim over the suit schedule property left behind by the Late Sri.Manikappa and also respondents would submits that admitting Sri.Keshava and thereafter his legal heirs have been in possession and ownership of Site No.6 from the date of the settlement deed without any objection from the legal heirs of Late Sri.Manikappa. Hence, submits that R.F.A filed by the appellant in - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:8878 RFA No. 439 of 2006 C/W RFA No. 425 of 2006 R.F.A.No.425/2006 may be allowed and consequently, the suit O.S.No.2607/1994 to be dismissed. 5. It is also stated in the memo that they are the occupants of site No.5 which is covered under the sale deed and also seeks time till 1st June-2025 to vacate the said premises and also to that effect, memo is placed on record and parties have also signed the said memo that is appellant Nos.1(a) to 1(d). They are the appellants in R.F.A.No. 439/2006. Having perused the memo wherein conceded for the dismissal of appeal R.F.A.No.439/2006 and also allowing of R.F.A.No.425/2006 wherein also conceded to allow the appeal. Consequently, dismissed the suit and also undertaken to vacate the premises on or before 1st of June-2025 by the appellant in R.F.A.No.439/2006. Having considered the memo as well as conceding the finding of the Trial Court in respect of R.F.A.No.439/2006, appeal is liable to be dismissed. In view of R.F.A.No.425/2006 also to be allowed by setting aside the order of the Trial Court in respect of the findings - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:8878 RFA No. 439 of 2006 C/W RFA No. 425 of 2006 which affect the R.F.A.No.425/2006 in respect of settlement deed pertaining to site No.6 and also agreed to vacate the site No.5 in which the appellant in R.F.A.No.439/2006 is in occupation. In view of the memo, the appeal R.F.A.No.425/2006 is allowed. Consequently, the suit in O.S.No.2607/1994 is dismissed. The R.F.A.No.439/2006 is also dismissed. 6. The appellants in R.F.A.No.439/2006 are given time till 1st June -2025 to vacate the premises of site No.5. 7. In view of the memo, the appellant in R.F.A.No.425/2006 becomes the owners in view of conceding the settlement deed executed by Smt.Muniyamma. Accordingly, these two R.F.As’ are disposed of. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE RHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61