GUJAMMA Vs. PUNDALIKAPPA PUNDALIKRAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is filed by the plaintiffs challenging the correctness of the judgment and decree of the first appellate court passed in ra No. 8/95 dated 25. 1. 1997 in setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the prl munsiff at bidar in os 456/89 dated 7. 1. 1995 urging that two substantial questions of law would arise for consideration of this court to exercise its power under Section 100 CPC.

(2.) THE rank of the parties is referred to in this judgment asdescribed in the plaint in original suit for the sake of convenience.

(3.) THE brief necessary facts for the purpose of considering and answering the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel on behalf or patties and also substantial question of law framed by this court are stated as hereunder: the plaintiffs filed original suit in old No. 69/87 on the file of the addl. Civil judge, bidar which was subsequently came to be transferred to the prl. Munsiff bidar and renumbered as os 456/89 for partition and separate possession of their half share in a and b schedule properties and for joint possession and enjoyment of their half share by granting judgment and decree in their favour and sending the same to the deputy commissioner for partition by metes and bounds. The claim of the plaintiff is that, they are the real sisters and daughters of late hanumanthappa who was the elder brother of defendant. Their father died during the year 1929 leaving behind him their mother late gundamma and his son eranna and the plaintiffs. It is the case of the plaintiffs that their father late hanumanthappa was a joint family member and a and b schedule properties are joint ancestral properties of hanumanthappa. After his death, his only son eranna died leaving behind his mother Smt. Gundamma and the plaintiffs. Their mother also died in the month of January 1987. It is contended by them that they are members of joint hindu undivided family and therefore they are joint owners in possession of suit schedule property. After the death of their father their mother late gundamma was in possession of the properties in question as no partition had taken pface and i. e. how they got common interest on undivided share in the suit schedule properties. After the death of gundamma, they filed aforesaid suit for partition for the reason that their attempt for partition with the defendant for their respective shares went in vain as he had refused to do so on 10. 3. 1987.