URMILA RAMESH Vs. AMITHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant, who was seventh defendant in OS No 109 of 2008 before the Senior Civil Judge, Mangalore, is questioning the legality and correctness of the judgment and decree passed on 3 -11 -2012, wherein the court below has passed a preliminary decree, declaring that the first respondent -plaintiff is having 1/6th share in all the suit schedule properties.

(2.) FOR the sake of convenience, the parties would be referred to as per their status in the trial court.

(3.) ACCORDING to plaint averments, one Veeramma Hengsu, grandmother of plaintiff, and one Manjappa Moolya acquired title to the plaint schedule properties by virtue of the order passed by the Land Tribunal, Mangalore in case No LTR(2) 351/76 -77 dated 29 -1 -1977 and thereafter Form No 10 was issued in the joint names of Veeramma Hengsu and Manjappa Moolya. The grandmother of plaintiff Veeramma Hengsu died intestate, leaving behind her children Bhooja Bengera father of the plaintiff and the second defendant as her legal heirs to succeed to her estate. Co -owner Manjappa Moolya also died leaving behind his children Padmanabha, Narayana, Kariya, Vittamma and Gulabi. Amongst the children of Manjappa Moolya, Padmnabha and Kariya are dead and daughter of Manjappa Moolya Vittamma died as a spinster. After the death of Veeramma Hengsu and Manjappa Moolya, all the suit schedule properties were continued to be under joint cultivation of their legal heirs. Contending that the plaintiff being the granddaughter of Veeramma Hegsu born to her first son Bhooja Bangera, she filed the suit for partition and separate possession.