IRANNA Vs. SOMANATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants No.2, 3 and 4 being the purchasers of Item No.2 of the suit property in Sy.No.127/5 measuring 09 acres 13 guntas are before this Court aggrieved by judgment and decree dtd. 3/9/2019 passed in O.S.No.83/2011 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Lingasguru, which is confirmed by the judgment and decree dtd. 7/9/2023 passed in R.A.No.71/2019 on the file of III Additional District and Sessions, Judge, Raichur Sitting at Sindhanur.

(2.) The above suit for partition separate possession is filed by plaintiffs who are the children of defendant No.1 contending that the suit schedule properties consisting of three landed properties and one house property being joint family ancestral properties, acquired by the defendant No.1 through his ancestors. The plaintiffs and the defendants being the joint family members are entitled for equal share, right, title and interest in the property. The defendant No.1 being addicted to bad vices, had neglected the plaintiffs and their mother who are forced to take shelter in their maternal grandparents' house. The defendant No.1 without there being any legal or family necessity sold the suit properties. The defendants No.2 to 4 being the adjoining landowners of the suit properties taking advantage of the situation, illegally obtained three registered deeds of sale in respect of Item No.2 of the suit properties. The defendant No.1, without having any exclusive right over the suit property alienated item No.2 to deprive the legitimate rights of the plaintiffs. Hence, the suit for cancellation of 03 deeds of sale dtd. 1/8/2011 executed by the defendant No.1 in favour of defendant No.2 to No.4 in respect of item No.2 of the suit property.

(3.) The defendants No.2 to 4 filed the written statement denying the plaint averments and admitted the relationship between the plaintiffs and defendant No.1. It is contented that defendant No.1 sold Item No.2 of the suit properties in their favour, in terms of 03 deeds of sale dtd. 1/8/2011 for a valuable sale consideration. The defendant No.1 sold the same to meet his family legal needs. The defendants No.2 to 4 are the bona-fide purchasers. The defendant No.1 is being the Karta of the joint family property was well within his legal authority to sell the property. Hence, sought for dismissal of suit.