LATHA HOLEYAPPA BULLA Vs. JAKKAVVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question arising for decision in both the appeals is, whether the plaintiffs and defendants 1, 5 and 6 are precluded from taking possession of Plaint-B schedule property (other than B-1 schedule property) in proportion to the shares declared by the trial court in its preliminary decree dtd. 26/4/2019 in O.S.No.2/2009 followed by final decree dtd. 30/5/2020 in FDP.No.13/2019 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Dharwad?"

(2.) These two appeals have the following factual background.

(3.) The findings of the trial court as regards the nature of tenancy is found in paragraphs 54 to 56 of its judgment. The findings are - the judgment in O.S. No. 126/2003 c/w O.S. No. 513/2004 (Ex.D.15, the certified copy of the judgment) is not binding on the plaintiffs as they were not parties in those suits, that neither Siddalingappa Bulla nor defendants 12 and 13 became the permanent lessees of schedule 'B' properties and that the lease in respect of 'B' schedule properties was for the lifetime of Siddalingappa Bulla and it ended with his death. For this reason the plaintiffs and the defendants 1, 5 and 6 have right over 'B' schedule properties. Defendants 12 and 13 have no locus standi to contend that the plaintiffs are not entitled to seek partition in 'B' schedule properties and that they can only claim share in the rental amount. It is the conclusion of the trial court that the company took schedule 'B' properties on lease for a period of 10 years from 7/11/1894 and that the lease was only a lifetime tenancy.