BABA SAHEB Vs. SHANTAKKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Regular Second Appeals in RSA.NO.505/2004 and in RSA.NO.355/2005 both filed under Section 100 of CPC are directed against the judgment dated 19.4.2000 passed in O.S.No.84/88 which was pending on the file of Court of Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Athani and confirmation of the same in regular appeals bearing R.A.No.39/2000 and R.A.No.7/2003, respectively, which were pending on the file of Court of II Additional District Judge, Belgaum. The Appellants in RSA.NO.505/2004 are defendants 1 to 4, respondent Nos.1 to 3 are plaintiffs and the fourth respondent is the fifth defendant in O.S.No.84/88. The appellant in RSA.No.355/2005 is the fifth defendant and the respondents are the plaintiffs the said original suit. The parties will be referred to as plaintiff nos.1 to 3 and defendant Nos.1 to 5 as per their ranking in the trail Court.

(2.) PLAINTIFFS chose to file a suit for partition and separate possession seeking 1/3rd share in the suit schedule properties as described in the schedule appended to the suit. Said suit had been contested by defendant Nos. 1 to 4 as well as 5th defendant the purchaser. The said suit came to be decreed after contest as against which regular appeals came to be filed under Section 96 CPC by defendant Nos.1 to 4 in R.A.No.39/2000 and by defendant No.5 in R.A.No.7/2003. Both the appeals have been dismissed after contest. It is these concurrent findings which are called in question as set out in the appeal memos.

(3.) THE facts leading to the filing of the suit and the consequential decree in the Original Suit and confirmation of the same in regular appeals are as follows: