- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 386 OF 2011 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. ROSHAN BI, W/O LATE KASEEM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU, KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 2. SRI MOHAMMED SHERIFF S/O LATE KASEEM SAHEB SINCE DEAD REPRESENT BY HIS LR'S 2(A) SMT. THAHIRA PARVEEN, WIFE OF LATE MOHAMMED SHARIF, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.24-108, KHASIM MANZIL, MOODABETTU, NEAR MOODABETTU SCHOOL, KODAVOORU POST, KODAVOOR, TENKANIDIYUR, UDUPI-576 106. 2(B) SMT. SHAMA PARVEEN, DAUGHTER OF LATE MOHAMMED SHARIF, WIFE OF K M ANSAR, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.3-117, AYISHA MANZIL, HOSATHOTA, KOLA KODAVOOR, MALPE, UDUPI-576 106. Digitally signed by KORLAHALLI BHARATHIDEVIKRISHNACHARYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 2(C) SRI. MOHAMMED NAYAZ, SON OF LATE MOHAMMED SHARIF, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.24-108, KHASIM MANZIL, MOODABETTU, KODAVOOR, TENKANIDIYUR, UDUPI-576 106. 2(D) SRI. MOHAMMED RIYAZ, SON OF LATE MOHAMMED SHARIF, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.24-108, MOODABETTU, KODAVOORU POST, KODAVOOR, TENKANIDIYUR, UDUPI-576 106. 3. SRI ABDUL AZIZ DAUGHTER OF LATE KASEEM SAHEB SINCE DEAD REPRESENT BY HIS LR'S 3(a) SMT. NAZIRA BANU, WIFE OF LATE ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.2-86, KASTURBA NAGAR, KUKKIKATTE, 76 BADAGUBEETU, UDUPI-576 101. 3(B) SRI.THOUSEEF, SON OF LATE ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.2-86, KASTURBA NAGAR, KUKKIKATTE, 76 BADAGUBEETU, UDUPI-576 101. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 3(C) SRI. THOUHID REHAMAN, SON OF LATE ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.2-86, KASTURBA NAGAR, KUKKIKATTE, 76 BADAGUBEETU, UDUPI-576 101. 3(D) SMT. TABASUM BANU, DAUGHTER OF LATE ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.2-86, KASTURBA NAGAR, KUKKIKATTE, 76 BADAGUBEETU, UDUPI-576 101. 3(E) SMT. TARANUM BANU, DAUGHTER OF LATE ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.2-86, KASTURBA NAGAR, KUKKIKATTE, 76 BADAGUBEETU, UDUPI-576 101. 4. SMT NOOR JHAN DAUGHTER OF LATE KASEEM SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT MOODABETTU, KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. (SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS) 4(A) SRI. ALI SAHEB, SON OF BAPU SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.23-43A2, MOODABETTU, NEAR MOODABETTU SCHOOL, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 KODAVOOR POST, KODAVOOR, TENKANIDIYUR, UDUPI- 576 106. 4(B) SRI.MUBEEN AHAMED, SON OF ALI SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1-150 B, HONNALA, MOODUBETTU, HARADI VILLAGE, HARADI POST, HARADI, UDUPI-576 106. 4(C) SRI.ABDUL JALEEL, SON OF ALI SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.23-43A2, MOODABETTU, NEAR MOODABETTU SCHOOL, KODAVOOR POST, KODAVOOR, TENKANIDIYUR, UDUPI-576 106. 4(D) SRI.GAFOOR, SON OF ALI SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.23-43A2, MOODABETTU, NEAR MOODABETTU SCHOOL, KODAVOOR POST, KODAVOOR, TENKANIDIYUR, UDUPI-576 106. 5. SRI ABDUL KHADER SON OF LATE KASEEM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 6. SRI RASHEED SON OF LATE KASEEM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 7. SMT ZUBEIDA DAUGHTER OF LATE KASEEM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 8. SMT THAIRA DAUGHTER OF LATE KASEEM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/AT MOODABETTU KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 9. SMT HASEENA DAUGHTER OF LATE KASEEM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT MOODABETTU KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 10. SMT JAIRA DAUGHTER OF LATE KASEEM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT MOODABETTU KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 11. SRI ANSAR SON OF LATE KASEEM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT MOODABETTU KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. &APPELLANTS (BY SMT. VASUNDRARA T.P., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. P.M. SIDDAMALLAPPA.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. KHATIJABI WIFE OF LATE ADAM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 2. SRI ABDUL GAFOOR SAHEM, S/O LATE ADAM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT MOODABETTU, KADAVOOR VILLAGE KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 3. SRI WAZIR SON OF LATE ADAM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU, KADAVOOR VILLAGE KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 4. SRI YUSUF SAHEB SON OF LATE ADAM SAHEB - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU, KADAVOOR VILLAGE KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 5. SMT HASEENA DAUGHTER OF LATE ADAM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU, KADAVOOR VILLAGE KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 6. SMT SAIRA DAUGHTER OF LATE ADAM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU, KADAVOOR VILLAGE KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 7. SMT JARINA DAUGHTER OF LATE ADAM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU, KADAVOOR VILLAGE KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 8. SMT ZORA DAUGHTER OF LATE ADAM SAHEB AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU, KADAVOOR VILLAGE KRODASHRAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 9. SRI SHEIK ZAFFAR SAHEM, SON OF LATE HALIMBI SINCE DEAD REPRESENT BY HIS LR'S 9(A) KURSHEED DAUGHTER OF LATE SHEIK ZAFFAR SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS RESIDING AT C/O KALKI CYCLE SHOP, B.M.RAOD, ALUR POST, HASSAN DISTRICT. 9(B) SRI. MAQBOOL SON OF LATE SHEIK ZAFFAR SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RESIDING AT C/O KALKI CYCLE SHOP, B.M.RAOD, ALUR POST, HASSAN DISTRICT. 10. SRI SHEIR SULAIMAN S/O LATE HALIMBI, SINCE DEAD REPRESENT BY HIS LR'S 10(A) SRI. ANSUR, SON OF LATE SHEIK SALAIMAN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDING AT C/O KALKI CYCLE SHOP, B.M.RAOD, ALUR POST, HASSAN DISTRICT. 11. SRI SHEIK SHABU SAHEB SON OF LATE HALIMBI AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS C/O KALKI CYLCLE SHOP, B M ROAD, ALUR POST HASSAN DISTRICT. 12. SMT KAIRU DAUGHTER OF LATE HALIMBI - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS C/O KALKI CYLCLE SHOP B M ROAD, ALUR POST HASSAN DISTRICT. 13. SMT MARIYA M, DAUGHTER OF LATE HALIMBI AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS C/O KALKI CYLCLE SHOP B M ROAD, ALUR POST HASSAN DISTRICT. 14. SRI ABDUL KHADER SAHEB SON OF LATE HALIMBI SINCE DEAD REPRESENT BY HIS LR'S 14(A) SMT. FIRRUNNISSA, WIFE OF LATE ABDUL KHADER SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU OF KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST, UDUPI TALUK AND DSITRICT. 14(b) SMT. MUNNIRO, DAUGHTER OF LATE ABDUL KHADER SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU OF KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST, UDUPI TALUK AND DSITRICT. 14 (C) SRI. NAWSHAD, SON OF LATE ABDUL KHADER SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT MOODABETTU OF KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST, UDUPI TALUK AND DSITRICT. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 14(D) SMT. NAYEENA, DAUGHTER OF LATE ABDUL KHADER SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT MOODABETTU OF KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST, UDUPI TALUK AND DSITRICT. 14(E) SMT. NAZEEMUNNISSSA, DAUGHTER OF LATE ABDUL KHADER SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, RESIDING AT MOODABETTU OF KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST, UDUPI TALUK AND DSITRICT. 14(F) SRI.YASHMEN, DAUGHTER OF LATE ABDUL KHADER SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESIDING AT MOODABETTU OF KADAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHRAMA POST, UDUPI TALUK AND DSITRICT. 15. SMT KHURSHIDABANU WIFE OF LATE BASHEER RESIDING AT MOODABETTU OF KODAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHARAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 16. SRI ZAMEER HUSSAIN S/O LATE BASHEER MAJOR R/AT MOODABETTU OF KODAVOOR VILLAGE UDUPI TALUK, KRODASHARAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 REPORTED DEATH ON 18.07.2012, NO LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES. 17. SMT KESAR PARVIN, DAUGHTER OF LATE BASHEER MAJOR, RESIDING AT MOODABETTU OF KODAVOOR VILLAGE, UDUPI TALUK, KRODASHARAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 18. SMT. KUSHBU DAUGHTER OF LATE BASHEER MAJOR, RESIDING AT MOODABETTU OF KODAVOOR VILLAGE KRODASHARAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 19. SRI KHALID, SON OF LATE BASHEER MAJOR, RESIDING AT MOODABETTU OF KODAVOOR VILLAGE UDUPI TALUK, KRODASHARAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 20. SRI KHALIQUE, SON OF LATE BASHEER, MAJOR, RESIDING AT MOODABETTU OF KODAVOOR VILLAGE UDUPI TALUK, KRODASHARAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 21. SMT KHAIRUNNISA DAUGHTER OF LATE SMT HANIFABI - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU OF KODAVOOR VILLAGE KRODASHARAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 22. SMT BANU, DAUGHTER OF LATE SMT HANIFABI, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU OF KODAVOOR VILLAGE KRODASHARAMA POST UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. 23. SMT. SAIBIMBI, DAUGHTER OF HASSAN SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 88 YEARS RESIDING AT MOODABETTU OF KODAVOOR VILLAGE, KRODASHARAMA POST, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.S.V.SHASTRI, ADVOCATE AND SRI.RAVINDRANATH K, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-5, R-6, R-7 ,R-8, R-9(A) AND (B), R-14(A TO F), R-15, R-17, R-18, R-19, R-20, R-21, R-22 ARE SERVED, VIDE ORDER DATED 05.01.2012, APPEAL AS AGAINST R-13 AND R-23 STANDS DISMISSED AS ABATED, VIDE ORDER DATED 18.07.2012, R-16 IS DEAD AND HAS NOT LEFT ANY LR'S. VIDE ORDER DATED 16.12.2015, SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R-10 (A), R-11 AND R-12 ARE HELD SUFFICIENT) - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED: 08.12.2010 PASSED IN R.A.NO.03/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT, UDUPI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 10.12.2001 PASSED IN O.S.115/1992 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN), UDUPI. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL JUDGMENT Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 8th December 2010, passed in R.A.No.3/2002, by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Udupi, (for short, `first Appellate Court'), confirming the judgment and decree dated 10th December 2001, passed by the Addl.Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Udupi, (for short, `trial Court'), in O.S.No.115/1992, the defendants have filed the present appeal. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the trial Court. - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently contended that the parties are governed by Muslim Law; There is no question of joint family properties; defendant No.1 filed Form No.7, since she has continued the tenancy right over the suit property from the original owner and had been paying the rent to the original owner; The Land Tribunal considered these facts and granted occupancy rights in favour of defendant No.1, therefore, it was her absolute property; Both the Courts below while appreciating the evidence on record, wrongly held that all the sons and daughters of original propositus - Hassan Saheb are tenants-in-common; The said finding is erroneous. Therefore, the substantial question of law arises for consideration in this regard and the same is mentioned in the appeal memo, that may be framed and appeal be admitted to consider the same. - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 5. Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 5 contended that, as per Form No.7 filed by the appellant No.1, she herself has stated that her father-in-law obtained the lease from the original owner in the year 1930 and he continued the tenancy right till his death and thereafter, all his sons and daughters continued the tenancy rights; The appellant No.1 filed Form No.7 for and on behalf of members of the family; The Land Tribunal granted occupancy rights in the name of appellant No.1 for and on behalf of the family. It was the main issue before the trial Court and the trial Court after appreciating the evidence on record, rejected the contention of appellant No.1. 6. The learned Appellate Judge confirmed the said findings. Therefore, no substantial question of law arise in this appeal for consideration. Moreover, it is a settled principle of law that tenancy rights is heritable as per Section 24 of the Land Reforms Act, 1961 (for short, `L.R.Act'). Section 4 of the said Act also describes as to - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 who are entitled to succeed to tenancy rights for the grant of occupancy rights. Therefore, even though the occupancy rights were granted in the name of appellant No.1, it ensures to the benefit of all the members of the family who are occupying and enjoying the fruits of the tenanted property. Therefore, no substantial question of law that arises in this appeal. Hence, prayed to dismiss the appeal. 7. The main crux of the matter is whether the subject matter of the suit is a property belonging to all the members of the family or is it the exclusive property belonging to the plaintiff. The trial Court has framed issue No.3 in this regard. While discussing the evidence on issue No.3, at page Nos.23 to27, at para Nos.14 to 18, the trial Court thoroughly discussed the above said issue and answered it against the defendants. 8. Being aggrieved by the said order of the trial Court, defendant Nos.1 to 11 preferred an appeal in - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 R.A.No.3/2002. In the impugned judgment, it appears, the main ground of appeal was regarding acquisition of tenancy rights by defendant No.1. Point Nos.1 and 2 framed by the first Appellate Court is also regarding the right of members of family of the defendants over the suit lands. The first Appellate Court also reproduced the contents of Form No.7 and after re-appreciating the materials available on record, held that even though the land was granted in the name of a member of the family and if the tenancy rights were succeeded by sons and daughters, then all the sons and daughters were entitled for right over the suit property and then the grant of occupancy rights in the name of one of the member of the family will ensure the benefit to all the members of the family. 9. Both the Courts below on appreciating and re-appreciating the materials available on record, have properly applied the law and facts and have held against the appellants, who are the defendants before the trial - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50401 RSA No. 386 of 2011 Court. Therefore, there is no substantial question of law that arises for consideration in this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE bk/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19