KAMALAVVA Vs. SIDDAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the lower court in dismissing the plaintiff's suit for partition, the plaintiff has filed this appeal.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff is that the suit schedule properties were owned by her father and the defendants. Defendant Nos.1 and 2 are her brothers and defendant Nos.3 and 4 are her sisters.

(3.) The case of the plaintiff is that defendants 1 and 2 namely her brothers are unnecessarily wasting the suit properties by creating a lease in favour of third parties by taking undue advantage of their names entered in the record of rights and they are threatening and arranging to dispose off the entire suit schedule properties being the joint family and the ancestral property to which the plaintiff is entitled to a share. Since her request for a share was denied, the instant suit for partition was filed. On service of summons, the defendants entered appearance. They denied the suit averments. They contended that there was a dispute raised by the plaintiff much prior to the filing of the suit which was settled in the Panchayat, in terms whereof, five tolas of gold in lieu of their share in the joint family property was given to the plaintiff also. Consequently, the properties were divided in terms of a Palu Patti vide Ex.D.3.