AKKAMAHADEVI Vs. NEELAMBIKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants in RFA No.100221/2016 are defendants 1 to 11 and the appellants in RFA.No.100197/2016 are plaintiffs 1 and 2 in O.S.173/2011 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gadag. Plaintiff No.3 died during pendency of the suit. Her legal representatives were already on record.

(2.) The plaintiffs suit was for partition and separate possession of their 1/10thshare each in thirteen landed properties described in schedule 'A' and four house properties described in schedule 'B' of the plaint. Rachappa Mallappa Betageri was the propositus, third plaintiff was his wife. Plaintiffs 1 and 2 and defendant 13 are the daughters, and defendants 1 and 8 to 12, Basappa and Mallappa, both being deceased, are the sons of Rachappa Mallappa Betageri and the third plaintiff. Defendant 1 is the wife and defendants 2, 3 and 4 are the children of deceased Basappa. Defendant 5 is the wife and defendants 6 and 7 are the children of Mallappa.

(3.) The plaintiffs claimed partition in schedule 'A' and schedule 'B' properties on the score that they were all ancestral joint family properties. They came to know that the defendants 1 to 11 created a false partition deed for their convenience, obtained their signatures and the signatures of defendants 12 and 13 deceitfully and obtained the mutations of the properties to their names. They stated that this mutation did not affect their share in the properties. Property bearing R.S.No.556/1A/1+2+3A measuring 7 acres 24 guntas exclusively belonged to third plaintiff but it was also included in the partition.