KUMAR BASAPPA Vs. HANAMANTAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is arising from the decree dismissing the suit for partition and separate possession. The suit is filed challenging the compromise decree in O.S.No.644/2010 on the file of Civil Judge, Gokak which was decreed in terms of the Compromise entered into among the parties on 26/2/2011. The plaintiffs/appellants are not the parties to the said Compromise. However, they are claiming under the 1st defendant- Hanamantappa who was a party to the said suit in O.S.No.644/2010. The admitted genealogy of the parties is as under: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_146_LAWS(KAR)11_2024_1.jpg</IMG>

(2.) One Sri.Pandappa was the propositus. He died on 18/9/1987. His wife is Mayavvaa. The couple has two daughters and one son. Vijaylaxmi and Basavva are the daughters. Hanamantappa is the son. The suit is filed by two children and wife of Hanamantappa. Hanamantappa is 1st arrayed as defendant. Mayavva the mother of Hanamantappa is 2nd defendant. Vijaylaxmi and Basavva who are the sisters of Hanamantappa are arrayed as defendants No.3 and 4.

(3.) The plaintiffs alleged that the properties are the exclusive properties of the 1st defendant-Hanamantappa. This contention raised on the premise that Pandappa the original owner died on 18/9/1987. The daughters of Pandappa taking into consideration the marriage performed by their father Pandappa, waived their right over the properties left behind by Pandappa and with their consent, the properties were mutated in the name of 1st defendant Hanamantappa. Thus, it is contended that Hanamantappa alone is the exclusive owner of the properties which is evidenced in ME No.4875 of Sunadholli village, Taluk:Gokak.