SEETHAMMA Vs. BATHENNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a plaintiffs' second appeal. Respondents were defendants in O. S. 75/1996 on the file of munsiff, Srinivasapur. The Plaintiffs filed the suit for partition and separate possession claiming 1/2 share in the suit properties and for mesne profits. According to the plaint averments, one bathenna had three sons by name; Venkataramanna, Muniyappa and Bathenna. Venkatararnanna had a son by name Siddappa, who was the husband of the 1st plaintiff and the father of the 2nd plaintiff. Defendants are the children of 3rd son Bathenna. The 2nd son muniyappa died issueless. After the death of Muniyappa, the present suit is filed by the grandson and daughter-in-law of Venkataramanna contending that they are entitled for half share in the properties of deceased Muniyappa.

(2.) THE suit was contested by the defendants contending that the plaintiffs' being the legal-heirs of predeceased brother's son of Muniyappa are not entitle to claim any share. According to them, the 1st defendant being brother of deceased Muniyappa has succeeded to the estate of deceased. The Trial Court after considering the case pleaded by the parties decreed the suit by holding that the plaintiffs are entitled for half share in all the suit properties. Thereafter, the defendants filed an appeal in R. A. No. 56/1997 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Sr. Dn)Kolar. The lower appellate Court considering the provisions of Hindu Succession Act, 1956, allowed the appeal of the respondents by holding that the plaintiffs being the grandson and daughter-in-law of Venkataramanna are not entitled to a share in the property of Muniyappa and that the 1st defendant alone has succeeded to the suit properties being the brother of muniyappa.

(3.) BEING aggrieved by the divergent findings of the Courts below, the present appeal is filed.