BASAVARAJ ALIAS SHIVABASAPPA Vs. SARSWATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This captioned second appeal is filed by the appellant - 2nd defendant questioning the concurrent findings of the Courts below, wherein plaintiff's suit seeking relief of declaration to declare plaintiff and 1st defendant as joint owners and further to declare that adoption of 2nd defendant by defendant No.1 and late Sharanappa Mankar as null and void and not binding on the plaintiff and defendant No.1 and for consequential relief of permanent injunction is decreed by both the Courts by holding that the adoption of 2nd defendant by defendant No.1 and late Sharanappa Mankar is null and void as the same is secured without getting consent of plaintiff, who is the second wife of late Sharanappa Mankar.

(2.) For the sake of brevity, the ranks of the parties are referred as they are ranked before the Trial Court.

(3.) The facts leading to the case are as under; Plaintiff claims that she is the second wife of one Sharanappa Mankar s/o Mallakajappa Mankar. It is claimed that husband of plaintiff and 1st defendant died on 22/6/2003. Plaintiff claims that she along with defendant No.1 are the only legal heirs and as Sharanappa died intestate, they have inherited the suit schedule properties under Sec. 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (for short "Succession Act, 1956"). The plaintiff further claimed that 2nd defendant is a distant relative of the plaintiff and 1st defendant and is no way concerned to the 1st defendant and plaintiff's family. The plaintiff has further alleged that 1st defendant and her husband late Sharanappa have suffered a compromise decree at the hands of the 2nd defendant in O.S.No.29/2003. The compromise recorded in O.S.No.29/2003 is a concocted and collusive decree only to deprive the plaintiff's inheritable rights in the suit schedule properties. Plaintiff further pleaded that since Sharanappa did not secure consent of plaintiff at the time of alleged adoption, the adoption is hit by Sec. 7 of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (for short "Adoptions Act, 1956") and therefore, sought relief of declaration to declare that the adoption of 2nd defendant is invalid and therefore, 2nd defendant will not acquire any right in the properties left behind by late Sharanappa.