NAGU AND ORS. Vs. GURUPAD AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff in O.S. No. 199/1994 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) Raibag has come up in this second appeal impugning the judgment rendered by both the Courts below in dismissing his suit for declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction.

(2.) The undisputed facts leading to this second appeal areas under:

(3.) The case built by the plaintiff in the original suit is to the effect that, besides he being the son of Tippanna Koshti and brother of Shivubai, he is also son -in -law of Shivuvai having married her daughter. According to him, Shivubai has given her share in R.S. No. 231 to him exclusively. Therefore, he is entitled to 6 acres 18 guntas as having succeeded to the same from defendant No. 2. According to him, as the son of Tippanna Koshti, he is entitled to 50% share in the property, which was allotted to his father and now in joint cultivation of himself and his brother defendant No. 1 in the original suit. Therefore, according to him, he is in possession and cultivation to an extent of 9 acres 9 guntas. In the original suit, he claimed that he has got 3/4th share in R.S. No. 231 of Nandikurali village and that his brother has got only 1/4th share in the said land. It is his grievance that his brother is trying to interfere with his 3/4th share, i.e., to an extent of 1/4th share in the entire R.S. No. 231, as the share belonging to defendant No. 1 and contending that the entire property which has fallen to the share of their father is taken by defendant No. 1, which is incorrect.