LAWS(KAR)-2020-1-27

RATHNAMMA Vs. KRISHNAPPA

Decided On January 02, 2020
RATHNAMMA Appellant
V/S
KRISHNAPPA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and perused the impugned order and the respective pleadings.

(2.) The plaintiffs in O.S.No.154/2016 have filed this appeal because their applications under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC for injunction against the respondents from transferring suit schedule properties and from harvesting eucalyptus trees in certain suit schedule properties are rejected by the impugned order dated 09.02.2017.

(3.) The appellants have filed the suit asserting that they are the daughters of late Sri Munimariyappa and the respondent Nos.1 to 14 are the legal representatives of Sri.Munimariyappa's brother, Sri.Chikkamariyappa. The appellants contend that they and the aforesaid respondents, as members of un-divided Hindu Family, own the suit schedule properties. The respondent Nos.1 to 14 have managed to secure the registered partition deed dated 21.12.2009 mis-representing to the appellants that certain document was required for the purposes of availing a bank loan. There is no partition by metes and bounds as per this registered partition deed dated 21.12.2009. The respondent Nos.1 to 14 have contested this suit asserting that the partition deed dated 21.12.2009 is executed by mutual consensus as requested for by the appellants. The properties that are subject matter of this partition deed dated 21.12.2009 were the only Joint Family Properties and the other properties are self acquired properties of the respective respondents. The civil Court on consideration of the rival claims, and referring to the documents produced in support there of, has concluded that the appellants have not established a prima facie case of mis-representation as pleaded by them. The civil Court has also concluded that if any interim order of injunction is granted in respect of suit schedule properties, which includes the properties purchased by the respective respondents after the partition deed dated 21.12.2009, the respondents would be put to irreparable loss and injury.