BASAMMA Vs. GOPARAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave Granted.

(2.) The present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment and order dtd. 22/2/2023 passed by the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench in Writ Petition No.102875 of 2021 (GM-CPC), whereby the High Court allowed the writ petition preferred by respondent no.1 herein [ Defendant No.5 (Goparappa) in OS No.165 of 1999.] and set aside the findings returned by the First Appellate Court [Court of Senior Civil Judge at Kushtagi in R.A.98/2015.] in Paragraph 24. Aggrieved thereof, the appellants [ Defendant No.1 (Basamma) and Defendant No.6 (Shivayya) in OS No.165 of 1999.] are before us.

(3.) The genesis of the present case lies in a suit for partition and separate possession being O.S. No.165 of 1999 instituted before the Court of Civil Judge & JMFC at Kushtagi [ Hereinafter referred to as 'Trial Court'.] by the plaintiffs, Veerabasamma (predecessor-in-interest of respondent no.2 herein) and Malakajamma (predecessor-in-interest of Respondent Nos.11 to 14 herein). The plaintiffs sought relief of partition and separate possession of 2/3rd share in the suit schedule properties. According to the plaintiffs, the suit properties originally belonged to one Basayya [Also referred to as 'Basaiah'.]. He had a son, namely Basalingaiah, and the plaintiffs were Basayya 's daughters, and sisters of Basalingaiah. Upon the demise of Basayya, the khata in respect of the suit properties was mutated in the name of Basalingaiah, being the male descendant in the family. However, despite the mutation, the plaintiffs claim that they continued to remain in joint possession thereof. It is further the case of the plaintiffs that Basalingaiah died in the year 1983, leaving behind defendant no.1 (appellant no.1 herein), Basamma (daughter) as his sole heir. Thereafter, the defendant no.1 allegedly got khata of the suit properties mutated in her name without the knowledge or consent of the plaintiffs and subsequently began asserting exclusive ownership over the suit schedule properties by creating thirdparty interests. Aggrieved thereby, the suit for partition and separate possession came to be instituted. For ready reference, below is the family genealogy: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_48_LAWS(SC)7_2026_1.jpg</IMG>