RAVI Vs. LAXMAVVA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 18/11/2015 passed by the Civil Judge and J.M.F.C. Yalburga, whereby the learned Civil Judge has allowed an application filed by the respondent under Order 16 Rule 1 of CPC.

(2.) Briefly, the facts of the case are that one Smt. Laxmavva, the plaintiff -respondent No. 1 filed a suit for partition and separate possession. In the suit she had claimed that she has a right over 1/3rd share in the suit property, as property belongs to a joint Hindu Family. According to the plaintiff -respondent No. 1, one Channappa was the owner of the suit property. He had three children namely, Venkareddy, plaintiff -Laxmavva and Timmappa -respondent No. 2 before this Court. She further claims that respondent Nos. 3 and 4, Smt. Sumitravva and Smt. Shoba, were the legal representatives of her brother Venkareddy, who has expired. In the plaint, she further claims that the plaintiff and defendants constituted a Hindu Joint Family. Since the suit properties are ancestral properties, since there was difference of opinion between the parties, when the plaintiff demanded her share and the defendants refused to partition the property, she has no option, but to file the civil suit.

(3.) The defendants filed their written statements; they specifically denied the fact that the plaintiff - Laxmavva was the daughter of Channappa. They further claimed that they did not constitute a joint Hindu family along with the plaintiff. According to them Channappa had died on 13/9/1988. Therefore, Timmappa the son of Channappa, and respondent Nos. 3 and 4 as the legal heirs of Venkareddy, have succeeded to the property. They further claim that after Channappa died there was rift between the Channappa's wife, and their two sons. Therefore, a partition had taken place on 24/7/2000.