SMT PARVATEVVA W/O BASUNAYAK ULLIGER v. SMT. BASAVVA W/O HANUMANTAPPA KURI
RFA/100202/2021 · 2025-10-30
B Muralidhara Pai, R Devdas
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 61748 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 61748 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14665-DB RFA No. 100202 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100202 OF 2021 (PAR/POS)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. PARVATEVVA W/O. BASUNAYAK ULLIGER, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 2. GOPAL S/O. BASUNAYAK ULLIGERI, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 3. MUTTU S/O. BASUNAYAK ULLIGERI, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 4. SMT. NEELAVVA W/O. MADIVALAPPA, JADAGANNAVAR, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 5. SMT. BHEEMAVVA W/O. NINGAPPA MALLASARJJA, AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. DASTIKOPPA, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI. 6. SMT. FAKKIRAVVA @ LAXMI W/O. HANUMANT NESARGI, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. SHIGIHALLI, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI. MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH 2025.10.31 09:57:36 +0530
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14665-DB RFA No. 100202 of 2021
7. KENCHANAYAKA S/O. RAMNAYAK ULLIEGERI, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 8. SANNABASAVANAYAK S/O. RAMANAYAK ULLIGERI, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 9. YALLANAYAK S/O. RAMANAYAK ULLIGERI, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 10. BHEEMNAYAK S/O. RAMANAYAK ULLIGERI, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 11. RAYANAYAK S/O. RAMANAYAK ULLIGERI AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 12. PREMAVVA W/O. NINGANAYAK ULLIGERI, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SATISH S.RAICHUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. BASAVVA W/O. HANUMANTAPPA KURI AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. NEAR JOSHI KALYANMANTAP, MADIHAL ROAD, DHARWAD. 2. SMT. CHANNAMMA W/O. MADIWALAPPA MATTIGATTI, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE AND HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. NAVALUR, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. - 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14665-DB RFA No. 100202 of 2021
3. SMT. DURGAMMA W/O. YALLAPPA GOULI, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 4. SMT. SHIVAKKA W/O. SHIVANAYAK ULLIGERI, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 5. IRANNA S/O. SHIVANAYAK ULLIGERI, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 6. SMT.
RENUKA D/O. SHIVANAYAK ULLIGERI, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 7. RAMANAYAK S/O. SHIVANAYAK ULLIGERI, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. GOVANAKOPPA, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. A.C.CHAKALABBI, SRI. S.G.NANDOOR, SRI. ANNESAHEB SHALAGAR AND SRI. S.B.DODDAGOUNDAR, ADVOCATES FOR R1 TO R3;
NOTICE ISSUED TO R4, R5, R7 ARE SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED;
APPEAL AGAINST R6 STAND DISMISSED VIDE ORDER DATED 04.07.2025)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH ORDER XLI RULE 1 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.03.2021 PASSED IN O.S.NO.406/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14665-DB RFA No. 100202 of 2021
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS)
It is noticed that, by order dated 04.07.2025 this appeal is dismissed as against respondent No.6. Further, in view of the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of SURESH CHANDRA (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS AND OTHERS VS PARASRAM & OTHERS (2025 INSC 873), such appeal will not survive for consideration if it is dismissed as against one of the respondents. It is noticeable that appellant No.10 has also died and no steps were taken by the appellants. 2. In view of the above, the Regular First Appeal stands dismissed as abated. Sd/- (R.DEVDAS) JUDGE
Sd/- (B. MURALIDHARA PAI) JUDGE MBS Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4