NAGARATHNAMMA Vs. RANGEGOWDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNSUCCESSFUL plaintiff is in appeal against the judgments of the courts below declining to grant her a decree for partition of the properties described in the schedule to assign unto her 1/5th share therein.

(2.) HEARD at length the contentious issues on the questions of law and facts urged by the designated senior counsel, Sri S.P. Shankar for the appellant and Sri Ajay J. Nandalike for M/s. Pragathi Law Chambers for the respondent and perused records made available in supplementation thereto, from which the following factual matrix manifests:

(3.) SO far as cause of action is concerned, he read out to me the averments in the plaint to show that cause of action arose 2 months prior to 2.1.1997 when she filed the suit. So far as relief for declaration that the deeds of sale in favour of the 5th defendant were not binding on her are concerned, he would submit once partition is claimed to assign a share unto her, there will be determination of her right and that right becomes enforceable unaffected by any transaction. In that context, the consequent relief of declaration could be granted by the court. The settlement deed dated 4.12.1961 admittedly conferred on Dyavamma right, title and interest and she died intestate. Under the provisions of Section 15(a) of the Hindu Succession Act, her legal heirs would be entitled to a share in the property in equal proportion. She left behind her husband -1st defendant, 3 sons -defendants 2 to 4 and the plaintiff. Thus her estate was divisible amongst the five surviving heirs and the plaintiff was entitled to 1/5th share therein.