CHANDRASHEKAR Vs. MEGHARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant. Learned counsel for respondents are absent. This Court made it clear that if counsel for respondents does not appear, the matter will be heard in their absence.

(2.) This appeal is filed by the plaintiff questioning the finding of the trial Court in respect of item at Sl.No.3 of schedule 'A' property i.e. 1 acre of land bearing Sy.No.214/2C2P.

(3.) The main contention of the plaintiff before the trial Court is that defendant Nos.3 and 4 are his sisters and defendant No.2 is his father and defendant No.1 is the purchaser of item at Sl.No.3 of the property. Defendant No.3 is the married sister and defendant No.4 is still unmarried. The said property belongs to the joint family and defendant No.2 got share of certain agricultural lands and house properties described in schedule 'A' and 'B' for family partition. The plaintiff's uncle had instituted O.S.No.19/87, the said was compromised. The properties are ancestral properties and defendant No.2 had sold property in favour of defendant No.1 on 13/10/1988 and by that time plaintiff and defendant Nos.3 and 4 were minors and sale was made not for any family necessity or for any joint family benefit. Defendant No.1 had sold a plot and accordingly defendant No.2 had sold the same in order to deprive the rights of the plaintiff and other family members and hence, sought for decree for partition of 'A' and 'B' schedule properties claiming 1/4th share.