- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5603 RSA No. 100216 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 100216 OF 2016 (PAR-) BETWEEN: SMT. KASTUREWWA W/O. SURESH BEERAPPANAVAR, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE & HOUSEHOLD, R/O: JALIKATTI-591170, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SOMAPPA KENCHAPPA BANAPPAVAR, AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST & PENSIONER, R/O: JALIKATTI-591 170, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. BASAVARAJ @ BASAPPA S/O. SOMAPPA BANAPPAVAR, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: JALIKATTI-591 170, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. KENCHAPPA S/O. SOMAPPA BANAPPAVAR, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: JALIKATTI-591 170, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 4. SMT. NINGAWWA W/O. KENCHAPPA BANAPPAVAR, AGE: 86 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: JALIKATTI-591 170, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HER LR’S RESPONDENT NO.1 AND RESPONDENT NO.2 MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5603 RSA No. 100216 of 2016 WHO ARE ALREADY ON RECORD AMENDMENT CARRIED OUT AS PER THE ORDER DTED 10.02.2022 & 21.08.2024 5. SMT. SIDDAWWA W/O. BEERAPPA NARENDRA, AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: YARAGATTI-591 129, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 6. SMT. DODDAWWA W/O. YALLAPPA MALAKANNAVAR, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: KADABI-591129, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 7. SMT. DHULAWA W/O. SOMAPPA BANAPPANVAR, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: JALIKATTI-591 170, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 8. KENCHAPPA S/O. YALLAPPA BANAPPANAVAR, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: JALIKATTI-591 170, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 9. RAMAPPA S/O. YALLAPPA BANAPPANAVAR, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: JALIKATTI-591 170, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 10. NIMBAWWA W/O NINGAPPA BANAPPANAVAR, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: JALIKATTI-591 170, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 11. MUDAKAPPA S/O. NINGAPPA BANAPPANAVAR, AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: JALIKATTI-591 170, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5603 RSA No. 100216 of 2016 12. MARUTI S/O. NINGAPPA BANAPPANAVAR, AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: JALIKATTI-591 170, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 13. ASHOK S/O. NINGAPPA BANAPPANAVAR, AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: JALIKATTI-591 170, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 14. SMT. DODBASAWA W/O. DUNDAPPA LAGALI, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: YARAGATTI-591 129, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 15. SMT. DODDAWA W/O. FAKIRAPPA GORAVANKOLLA, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: JALIKATTI-591 170, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 16. SMT. SHANKAREWA W/O. ADIVEPPA LADADI, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: JALIKATTI-591 170, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 17. SMT. PREMA W/O. BASAPPA KURI, AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: JALIKATTI-591 170, POST: TALLUR, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 18. SMT. SHILPA W/O. SOMAPPA IRANNAVAR, AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: CHUNCHNUR, TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELAGAVI. 19. KUMARI AKKAWA D/O. BASAPPA NARENDRA, AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: YARAGATTI-591 129, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5603 RSA No. 100216 of 2016 20. KUMARI NEELAWA D/O. BASAPPA NARENDRA, AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: YARAGATTI-591 129, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 21. MAHADEVI W/O. BEERAPPA SANKANNAVAR, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: HARGOPPA, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHREEVATSA S. HEGDE & SRI. SOURABH HEGDE, ADVOCATES FOR R1-R3; SMT. SHASHIKALA PATRI K., ADVOCATE FOR R7; R4-DECEASED; R5, R6-R19 & R21 ARE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED; R20-HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED IN R.A.NO.195/2012 DATED 19/01/2016 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE BELAGAVI AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE SAUNDATTI IN O.S.NO.30/2010 DATED 28/07/2012 BY ALLOTTING THE 1/4TH SHARE IN ALL THE SUIT PROPERTIES IN FAVOUR OF THE PLAINTIFF IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred by the plaintiff challenging the judgment and decree dated 19.01.2016 in R.A.No.195/2012 on the file of the II-Additional District Judge, Belagavi, (for short - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5603 RSA No. 100216 of 2016 “the First Appellate Court”) dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment and decree dated 28.07.2012 in O.S.No.30/2010 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Saundatti (for short “the Trial Court”) decreeing the suit in part. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rank before the Trial Court. 3. Plaint averments in brief are that the plaintiff and defendant No.2 and 3 are the children of defendant No.1. Defendant No.4 is the mother of defendant No.1. Defendant No.5 and 6 are the sisters of defendant No.1. It is the case of the plaintiff that the suit schedule property is belonged to the grandfather of the plaintiff–Mudukappa, who had two wives. It is further stated in the plaint that the plaintiff has got equal share along with defendant No.1 to 3 and as such, the plaintiff has filed O.S.No.30/2010 seeking relief of partition and separate possession in respect of the suit schedule property. 3.1. After service of notice, the defendant No.1 to 3 entered appearance and denied the averments made in the plaint, however, supported the contention of the plaintiff. The defendant No.4 to 6 were impleaded in the suit. Defendant - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5603 RSA No. 100216 of 2016 No.5 and 6 sought for equitable share in the suit schedule property. Based on pleadings on record, the Trial Court framed issues for its consideration. 3.2. In order to establish their case, plaintiff has examined two witnesses as PW1 and PW2 and produced 6 documents, which were marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P6. The defendants have examined two witnesses as DW1 and DW2 and no documents were produced by the defendants. The Trial Court, after considering the material on record, decreed the suit in part. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff has preferred R.A.No.195/2012 before the First Appellate Court and same was resisted by the defendants. The First Appellate Court, after appreciating the material on record, by its judgment and decree dated 19.01.2016, dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment and decree in O.S.No.30/2010. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff has preferred this appeal. 4. This Court vide order dated 18.03.2025 formulated the following substantial question of law: - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5603 RSA No. 100216 of 2016 Whether both the Courts below were justified in allotting shares to the plaintiff and defendants? 5. I have heard Sri. Shriharsh A Neelopant, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri.Shreevatsa S Hegde, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 6. It is contended by Sri. Shriharsh A Neelopant, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the plaintiff is entitled for 1/4th share in the suit schedule properties along with the defendant No.1 to 3 and therefore, sought for interference of this Court. 7. Per contra, Sri. Shreevatsa S Hegde, learned counsel appearing for the respondents sought to justify the impugned order. 8. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, I have carefully examined the findings recorded by both the Courts below. The plaintiff has filed a suit seeking relief of partition and separate possession in respect of suit schedule property. In order to - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5603 RSA No. 100216 of 2016 understand the relationship between the parties, the genealogy is produced as under. Kenchappa Ningawwa (D4) Somappa (D1) Siddawwa(D5) Doddawwa (D6) Basavaraj Kenchappa Kasturavva (D2) (D3) (Plaintiff) 9. Perusal of the genealogy would indicate that the plaintiff and defendant No.2 and 3 are the children of defendant No.1. Defendant No.4 is the grandmother of plaintiff and defendant No.2 and 3. Defendant No.5 and 6 are the sisters of defendant No.1. It is not in dispute that the suit schedule property is belonged to Mudukappa and same was devolved to the share of the father of the defendant No.1-Kenchappa. Therefore, defendant No.1, defendant No.5 and 6 are entitled for 1/3rd share each in the joint family property of Kenchappa. The plaintiff, defendant No.2 and 3 are the children of defendant No.1 (Somappa) and therefore, plaintiff and - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5603 RSA No. 100216 of 2016 defendant No.1 to 3 are entitled for 1/12th share each in the suit schedule property. 10. In that view of the matter, both the Courts below have committed error in allotting actual share in favour of the plaintiff and same is rectified in the present appeal. In the result, the substantial question of law framed above favours the plaintiff and accordingly, plaintiff and defendant No.1 to 3 are entitled for 1/12th share each in the suit property. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed. ii) The judgment and decree dated 19.01.2016 in R.A.No.195/2012 passed by the II- Additional District Judge, Belagavi is hereby set aside. iii) The judgment and decree dated 28.07.2012 in O.S.No.30/2010 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Saundatti is hereby set aside and share of the parties are modified accordingly as plaintiff and defendant No.1 to 3 are entitled for 1/12th share each in the suit schedule property. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5603 RSA No. 100216 of 2016 iv) In view of disposal of the appeal, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE YAN CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41