THABAGOUDA SATTEPPA UMARANI Vs. SATTEPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.

(2.) This review petition is f i led against the judgment of the lower appellate Court fixing 1/4th share in respect of the share of wife and her husband. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, second appeal has been preferred before this Court. The second appeal has been disposed of by this Court reversing the order of the lower appel late Court.

(3.) Before the trial Court, it appears among the chi ldren and the mother 1/8th share was given. Being aggrieved by that order when the appel lants viz., the respondents have preferred an appeal challenging granting 1/8th share to the mother on the ground that the mother cannot have separate share other than the property avai lable to the father. However, the lower appellate Court conf irmed the said order, against which the second appeal is by the 1st defendant. In that, this Court in para 10 of the judgment referring to the legal position held that the f inding of the Courts below appears to be erroneous and also held that husband and wife can get one share and remaining coparceners can get one equal share i .e. , l/7th share each. As against this, the review petition is fi led.