SUDHA Vs. KAVERAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed impugning the order and decree dated 11.9.2015 in O.S.No.87/2014 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and CJM at Madikeri. The appellants, who were sixth and seventh defendants in the suit in O.S.No.87/2014, are aggrieved by the impugned order and the consequential decree because the trial court, after advancing the hearing of the suit from 16.9.2015 to 11.9.2015 dismissed the suit as not pressed and decreed the counter claim made by the first to fourth defendants for declaration that they are the owners of item no.1 of the suit schedule property. The trial court passed the impugned order accepting the memo filed, and the submission made by the counsel for the plaintiff, that the plaintiff would not press the suit that was instituted for partition of suit schedule properties and that the counter claim made by the first to fourth defendants could be accepted and decreed.

(2.) The appeal is listed for admission, and given the facts and circumstances of the case and the grounds urged in support of the appeal, with the consent of the counsel for the appellants and the respondents, the counsel are heard on the merits of the appeal for final disposal.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants, who are sixth and seventh defendants in the suit, filed necessary pleadings in the suit asserting that they were also entitled for a share in the suit schedule properties as claimed by the plaintiff and as such, the trial court could not have passed the impugned order resulting in the consequential decree in favour of the first to fourth defendants without adjudication of the appellants' claim for separate shares merely because the plaintiff filed a memo acceding to the counter claim made by the first to fourth defendants and withdrawing her claim for a share.