NINGAPPA Vs. SHLVAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE l. rs of the original plaintiff lingappa, in a suit for partition, claiming half a share, is the appellant herein. The suit was dismissed by the court below. Hence, the second appeal.

(2.) CLAIMING that one kedari and his sons bhima and balu were the original owners of the suit property, it was alleged that all of them died in 1980 (sic), within a span of five days. Kedari's widow siddalingawwa, survived representing that branch, and she took the plaintiff in adoption on 16-11-1937. Kedari and his brother mahadu were members of the joint family and no partition took place between them. Mahadu was managing the family affairs and after him, his son ningappa and after ningappa's death, his younger brother shivappa. There was a sham partition in 1941 without giving any share to kedari's branch and it was therefore claimed that such partition was not binding on the plaintiff.

(3.) THE second defendant, natural father of the plaintiff, admitted the claim, while the other defendants, that is, l. rs of shivappa and l. rs of ningappa. It was contended that the plaintiff was not adopted by siddalingawwa and he was not entitled to the share. There was a partition between defendants 1 to 4, in 1938, and the plaintiff is entitled to the share to the property allotted to his natural son, the second defendant. The question of limitation was also raised. Holding the adoption as not proved, the suit was dismissed by the trial court. However, the appellate judge holding the adoption is proved, held that the adoption is not valid in the eye of law. The partition also is held to be binding as the natural father the second defendant was allotted his share in all the joint family properties.