SOMAKKA (DEAD) Vs. K.P.BASAVARAJ (DEAD)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the own sister of the sole respondent. Their father Puttanna had inherited certain properties from his father which were ancestral properties and are described as item nos. 1 and 2 of Schedule 'A' to the plaint, whereas property described at item no. 3 was alleged to be self-acquired property of Puttanna on the basis of occupancy rights. In so far as the property described at Schedule 'B', it belonged to the respondent which the appellant claimed to have purchased.

(2.) The appellant is the plaintiff in OS No. 2506 of 1991 instituted in the Court of the City Civil Judge, Bangalore, wherein the sole defendant is the respondent herein (brother of the appellant). Primarily, two reliefs were claimed in the said suit; firstly a partition and separate possession of 1/4 (one fourth) share in properties described at item nos. 1 and 2 and 1/2(one half) share in the property described in item no. 3 of Schedule 'A' to the plaint; the second relief prayed was for a decree of specific performance of the agreement and sale dtd. 25/5/1981 with respect to the property described in Schedule 'B' to the plaint.

(3.) The claim set up by the appellant was that properties described at item nos. 1 and 2 in Schedule 'A' were ancestral properties and, therefore, upon the death of her father in 1974, she would be entitled to 1/4 share and further that the property described as item no.3 of Schedule 'A' was exclusively occupied by her father who had applied before the revenue authorities for being declared as an occupant and the same was pending at the time when her father died. Later on, it was continued to be prosecuted by the respondent and it was ordered that his name be recorded as occupant as such she would be entitled to 1/2 share. With respect to the relief of specific performance of contract, it was alleged that she had paid a sum of Rs.12,000.00 for purchasing 1 acre and 10 guntas in Survey no. 60 situated on Dyavasandra Village, Krishnarajapura Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk and for which an agreement to sell dtd. 25/5/1981 was executed. The respondent had placed the appellant in possession of the said property. Later on, he declined to execute the sale deed despite appellant being always ready and willing to perform her part of the obligation to the agreement.