HALAPPA S/O ARASUR VEERAPPA Vs. SIDDAPPA S/O ARASUR VEERAPPA, LOKESHAPPA S/O ARASUR VEERAPPA AND MALLAMMA W/O LATE ARASUR VEERAPPA (SMT. HIRIYAMMA W/O KALLINGAPPA, SMT. HALAMMA W/O KALLAPPA, SMT. RUDRAMMA W/O LATE RUDRAPPA AND SMT. GOWRAINRNA W/

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is plaintiffs appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court which has dismissed the suit for partition and separate possession on the ground that there was earlier oral partition as such the relief sought for in the suit cannot be granted.

(2.) FOR the purpose of convenience the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the original suit.

(3.) AFTER service of summons defendant No. 2 filed a detailed written statement. He admitted the relationship between the parties. He specifically contended that the plaintiff, defendants 1 and 2 are the sons of late Arasur Veerappa. The plaintiff's marriage was celebrated by the father of plaintiff. Immediately after the marriage the plaintiff separated from the defendants' family by taking his share of properties during the lifetime of plaintiffs father. The plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 had entered in to partition during the year 1945 and in the said partition the plaintiff had taken his share in land bearing Sy.No. 22/1 measuring to an extent of 3 acres 18 guntas, one ankanas house and also kana. The remaining properties of the joint family continued with the joint family members consisting of defendants 1 and 2, their father and sisters. They continued to be in joint possession and enjoyment of the remaining properties. The sisters marriage was celebrated by the defendants investing huge amount and all of them are residing in their husbands' places. After the partition, he sold the same to defendant 1 during the year 1974 and also the house and kana property in the year 1961 for valuable consideration of Rs. 500/ - and also for Rs. 3000/ -. From the sale proceeds the plaintiff purchased the land at Muggenagihalli village in Jagalur Taluk with an intention to settle permanently there. On 15.2.1990 the defendants 1 and 2 have entered in to a partition and the same is registered. The 3rd defendant is residing with the 2nd defendant and he has been looking after her providing food and shelter. There is no joint family in existence of which the plaintiff is a member after 1960 and the plaintiff and his sons were never in joint possession of the suit schedule properties. The suit schedule 'B' properties are not the joint family properties and they exclusively belong to defendants 1 and 2. Item No. 4 in suit schedule 'A' was purchased by the 1st defendant, which is not a joint family property. Item Nos. 1 and 4 fell to the share of defendant No. 1 and item Nos. 2 and 3 are fell to the share of defendant No. 2 as per the partition and they are enjoying the suit properties. They have developed the properties by hard work and the plaintiff being unable to tolerate with their prosperity has filed the suit for partition and separate possession.