SHANTHAPPA Vs. CHANNABASAVAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants/plaintiff have come up with this second appeal challenging the legality and correctness of the judgment and decree dated 1. 3. 2002 passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division) and CJM at Tumkur in RA Nos. 13 and 18 of 1991 and judgment and decree dated 13. 12. 1990 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior division) Gubbi in O. S. No. 60/1982.

(2.) FOR the sake of convenience the parties will be referred to in their rank assigned to them before the trial Court.

(3.) THE brief facts of the case in a nutshell are that; the plaintiff has filed the suit against defendants before the trial Court for partition and separate possession in respect of suit schedule properties consisting of 19 items. It is the case of plaintiff that one Shankarappa had three sons namely, Lingappa, Gangaiah and Channabasavaiah; that the said shankarappa died leaving behind the said three sons to succeed to his estate; that Lingappa 1st son died leaving behind 2nd and 3rd defendants; that 2nd son Gangaiah died leaving behind his son 1st defendant; that 3rd son Channabasavaiah died leaving behind the plaintiff; that the suit schedule properties are ancestral and joint family properties of plaintiff and the defendants; that difference arose in the management of joint family properties; that plaintiff requested the defendants to effect partition of the joint family properties; that defendants have not complied the request of the plaintiff. Hence he filed the suit.