BALADANDAPPA Vs. RAMAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant/plaintiff feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree of First Appellate Court on the file of Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) & CJM., Koppal in R.A.No.8/2007, dtd. 11/10/2007, preferred this appeal.

(2.) Parties to appeal are referred with their ranks as assigned before Trial Court for the sake of convenience.

(3.) The factual matrix leading to the case of plaintiff can be stated in nutshell to the effect that plaintiff and defendant are brothers and their father Rangappa Channadas died long back. The plaintiff and defendant are joint family members and there is no partition in between them with respect to suit property. On the death of father of plaintiff and defendant both of them have succeeded to suit property and they are living separately for their convenience in portion of the suit house. The suit property is ancestral property of family of plaintiff and defendant standing in the name of grand father of plaintiff and defendant. Plaintiff demanded equal partition and separate possession in the suit property, but the defendant has refused for the same. Therefore, plaintiff was constrained to institute suit for the relief claimed in the suit.