S. B. SAMPAT KUMAR Vs. S. B. PARASMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Prl. Sr. Civil Judge, Ballari, by her judgment dated 29.04.2014, partly decreed the suit O.S. No. 404/2007, granting 1/3rd share to the plaintiffin 'A' schedule property while dismissing it in respect of 'B' and 'C' schedule properties. The first defendant is in appeal as he is aggrieved by the decree in respect of 'A' schedule property.

(2.) The material facts are:

(3.) The first defendant, in his written statement admitted the relationship and life interest being given to his mother Sundar Baiin the will dated 03.04.1982 made by Bhaktawarmal. His main contention is that the life interest given to the mother was in lieu of maintenance and therefore by virtue of Sec.14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act (for short 'Act'), the mother became the absolute owner and thus derived testamentary capacity to make a willin his favour on 19.05.1995. The plaintiff or the second defendant had no right to claim partition. He stated that he was not in possession 'B' schedule property and that the plaintiff cannot claim partition in respect of household items that he purchased from his self earnings. He further contended that since the will made by Bhaktawarmal recited that the grandchildren of Bhaktawarmal would ultimately take the property, all the grandchildren should have been made parties to the suit and thereby the suit was bad for non joinder of necessary parties. Another contention of the first defendant is that plaintiff was given another property bearing no.10/1, Car Street, Ballari towards his share and this property should have been included in the suit.