PEDDA KEMPAIAH DECEASED Vs. BERAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second appeal arises out of a suit for declaration of plaintiffs title to the suit properties and for injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs possession and enjoyment of the suit properties or in the alternative to order partition of the ?B? schedule properties into 25 equal shares and allot six shares to the plaintiff. THE trial court dismissed the suit, but the appellate court granted a decree declaring the title of the plaintiff to ?A? schedule properties and gr anting injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff. THE Second appeal has been filed by the first defendant and the third defendant. THE other defendants were made parties to the appeal along with the plaintiff.

(2.) DURING the pendency of the appeal the first appellant died and the applications to bring his legal representatives on record, to set aside the abatement caused by the death of the first appellant and to condone the delay in weeking to set aside the statement were all dismissed by me today (vide C.M.P. No. 15138 to 15141 of 1990). In view of the dismissal of the said applications the appeal stands dismissed as against the first appellant.