PRAVEENA Vs. SHEKARAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-plaintiff and learned counsel for the respondents-defendants.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case of the appellantplaintiff before the Trial Court is that defendant No.1 and 2 are sons and defendant No.4 is the daughter of one Halagappa.

(3.) It is the further case of the plaintiff that the defendants are making attempts to alienate the suit schedule properties with an intention to deprive his share in the suit schedule properties and also misused the income of the schedule properties. Hence, filed the suit for the relief of partition. The plaintiff has also sought for declaration to the effect that registered partition deed dtd. 3/9/2002 and registered Will dtd. 5/10/2002 is not binding on his share and further sought for an order of injunction against the defendants. Initially, the suit was filed only against the defendant Nos.1 and 2. After appearance of the defendant Nos.1 and 2, after filing of the written statement by the defendant Nos.1 and 2, the plaintiff has got the plaint amended and included the defendant Nos.3 to 5 as the parties to the suit.