SRI. YALAGURDAPPA S/O MALLAPPA HARAGI v. RAYAPPA S/O YAMANAPPA KURI
WP/102548/2024 · 2025-10-17
Anant Ramanath Hegde
Original Suitbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 37363 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 37363 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14133 WP No. 102548 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
WRIT PETITION NO.102548 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
SRI. YALAGURDAPPA S/O MALLAPPA HARAGI, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. HUVINAHALLI, TQ. HUNGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT-587 101. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. G.I. GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. RAYAPPA S/O YAMANAPPA KURI, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. HUVINAHALLI, TQ. HUNGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT-587 101. 2. SMT. SHARAVVA W/O RAYAPPA KURI, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. HUVINAHALLI, TQ. HUNGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT-587 101. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. POOJA R. SAVADATTI, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 06-02-2024 MADE IN M.A. NO.3/2022 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HUNGUND PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-G AND ALSO THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15-09-2022 MADE IN O.S. NO.392/2021 ORDER ON I.A. NO.1 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE, HUNGUND PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-F BY ISSUE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTIONS AND FURTHER ALLOW DISMISS THE I.A. NO.I.
Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14133 WP No. 102548 of 2024
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)
1. This writ petition is filed assailing the order passed by the trial Court granting temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiffs, which is confirmed by the First Appellate Court. 2. The plaintiffs have filed a suit for declaration of title and injunction contending that they are the owners of the property and defendant has no right over the suit scheduled property. 3. The defendant has filed the written statement as well as the counter claim contending that he has inherited the property under the registered Will dated 10.07.2013. 4. Admittedly, the defendant is neither the class-I heir nor class-II heir of deceased Yamanavva under
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14133 WP No. 102548 of 2024
whom he is claiming right over the property based on the alleged Will. 5. The plaintiffs are the class-II heirs of deceased Yamanavva.
The defendant will succeed to the property provided the alleged Will dated 10.07.2013, executed by Yamanavva is established. So far the Will is not established. After the demise of Yamanavva, the property records stand in the name of the plaintiffs. 6. Thus, this Court does not find any error in the order passed by the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court granting temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiffs. 7. However, it is required to be noticed that in case the defendant succeeds in establishing the alleged Will of Yamanavva, it would mean that the defendant is the owner of the property and the plaintiffs are not having any right over the property. - 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14133 WP No. 102548 of 2024
8. In that event, plaintiffs will have to share the amount of profit that they have derived from the suit schedule property. Thus, till the disposal of the suit, the plaintiffs shall, every year, furnish accounts relating to the income and expenditure from the suit schedule properties; the nature of the crops grown, the amount derived from the sale of the crops, and the expenditure incurred for cultivating the suit lands. In case the defendant succeeds, the plaintiffs will have to share the amount of profit that they have derived from the suit schedule property. 9. With these observations, this petition is disposed of. 10. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. 11. It is also made clear that memo of calculation relating to income and expenditure provided by the
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14133 WP No. 102548 of 2024
plaintiffs is not conclusive and actual income/profit derived from the lands should be adjudicated based on evidence. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE
AM CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 11