Karnataka High Court
RFA/505/2014 of SHRI L.VENKATAESHBABU Vs SMT. L. SHANTHI on 8 July 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:34578-DB RFA No. 505 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 505 OF 2014 (PAR) BETWEEN: SHRI L.VENKATAESHBABU S/O LATE
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 505 OF 2014 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
SHRI L.VENKATAESHBABU
S/O LATE LAKSHMAIAH NAIDU
SINCE DEAD BY LRs.,
SMT. V.SUJATHA,
W/O LATE L.VENKATAESHBABU,
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
SMT.LAKSHMIAH VIGNESH,
S/O LATE L.VENKATESHBABU,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
3.
SRI. SURYAKANTH,
S/O LATE L.VENKATESHBABU,
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS,
4.
SRI. EASHWAR,
S/O LATE L.VENKATESHBABU,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
ALL ARE R/AT LAKSHMI TALKIES
COMPLEX, DANIAL ROAD,
ANDERSONPET, ALLIKALLUR,
KOLAR-563113.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. V B SHIVA KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR LRs. DECEASED
SOLE APPELLANT)
Digitally
signed by
VASANTHA
KUMARY B
K
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
AND:
1.
SMT. L. SHANTHI
W/O SHRI C PATTABHIRAMAN
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
REP BY HER G P A HOLDER
SHRI C PATTABHIRAMAN
R/AT NO.114, UPSTAIRS
18TH CROSS, LAKSHMIPURAM
ULSOOR, BANGALORE 560 008
2.
SMT LALITHA
W/O VENUGOPAL
MAJOR BY AGE
R/AT LAKSHMI TALKIES BUILDING
ANDERSONPET POST
K G F - 563 113
3.
SMT AMARAJYOTHI
W/O SOUNDARARAJAN
MAJOR BY AGE
R/AT LAKSHMI TALKIES BUILDING
ANDERSONPET POST
K G F - 563 113
4.
SMT SANGEETHA
MAJOR BY AGE
R/AT LAKSHMI TALKIES BUILDING
ANDERSONPET POST
K G F -563 113
[DEFENDANT No.5 IS DEAD,
HER LR IS ALREADY ON RECORD
AND IS MADE PARTY IN
THIS APPEAL AS RESPONDENT No.4]
5.
NOORIE EDUCATIONAL
SOCIETY & GOLDEN COLLEGE OF PHARMACY
ANDERSONPET, K G F 563 113
REP BY ITS SECRETARY
SHRI L S SHAHZADHA
S N M SCHOOL ROAD
HC-KAR
ANDERSONPET, K G F 563 113
6.
SMT FARHANA BEGUM
W/O SHRI SYED IQBAL.L
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/AT S N M SCHOOL ROAD
ANDERSONPET
K G F 563 113
7.
SMT FARHANA BEGUM
W/O SHRI SYED IQBAL
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/AT S N M SCHOOL ROAD
ANDERSONPET
K G F 563 113
8.
8(a)
R MATHY
DEAD BY LRS
SMT SARASWATHI
W/O LATE MATHI
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/AT NO.53, 7TH CROSS ROAD
OPP NEHRU GROUND
ROBERTSONPET
K G F 563 113
8(b)
SMT LATHA
D/O LATE MATHI
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/AT NO.53, 7TH CROSS ROAD
OPP NEHRU GROUND
ROBERTSONPET
K G F 563 113
8(c)
SHRI RAJA
S/O LATE MATHI
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
R/AT NO.53, 7TH CROSS ROAD
OPP NEHRU GROUND
ROBERTSONPET
K G F 563 113
HC-KAR
8(d)
SMT MANJULA
D/O LATE MATHI
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
R/AT NO.53, 7TH CROSS ROAD
OPP NEHRU GROUND
ROBERTSONPET
K G F 563 113
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. P RAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1;
VIDE ORDER DATED:08.07.2015, SERVICE OF NOTICE TO
R2 TO R4 HELD SUFFICIENT;
SRI. S.V.PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R5;
R6 TO R8(a TO d) ARE SERVED)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96(1) OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 5.12.2013
PASSED IN O.S.NO.26/1993 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE, K.G.F., DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION, SEPARATE POSSESSION, MESNE PROFITS, ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
We have taken this appeal in revised call. Though respondent No.1/plaintiff had entered appearance on caveat, neither she nor her learned counsel chose to remain present at the time of hearing. Accordingly, the appeal has been heard in their absence.
HC-KAR
2. The present appeal under Section 96 (1) read with Rule 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 CPC has been filed by the first defendant/appellant impugning the judgment and decree dated 05.12.2013 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, K.G.F.
3. One C. Lakshmaiah Naidu, father of plaintiff/respondent No.1 and defendant No.1/appellant died on 22.12.1988 intestate. The Family tree of late C. Lakshmaiah Naidu, as described in the plaint is as under:
C.LAKSHMAIAH NAIDU DIED ON 22ND December, 1988
Lalitha Amarjyothi Venkatesh Babu Shanthi Sangeetha w/o Venugopal 33 years 28 years(Son) 22 years Minor by (daughter) w/o sounder- w/o her mother Rajan Pattabi- 16 years Raman (Daughter) (Daughter)
4. The plaintiff had filed the suit claiming partition and separate possession of her 1/6th share in the suit schedule property. It is not in dispute that out of the four daughters of late C. Lakshmaiah Naidu, three sisters, other than the plaintiff,
HC-KAR
executed relinquishment deeds in favour of the defendant No.1/appellant on 28.03.2006, relinquishing their respective shares in the suit schedule property.
5. The learned Trial Court, despite the execution of the aforesaid relinquishment deeds by the three sisters in favour of the defendant No.1/appellant, proceeded to hold that the plaintiff was entitled to 1/2 share in the suit schedule property, on the ground that the amount paid to the three sisters were paid under the relinquishment deeds was from the joint family nucleus allegedly created from the suit schedule property. The only point that arises for consideration in this appeal is: Whether the plaintiff has established that a joint family nucleus was created from the suit schedule property and that the consideration paid under the relinquishment deeds executed by the three sisters in favour of defendant No.1/appellant was from his own?
6. The plaintiff did not produce any document to suggest that a nucleus was created out of the suit schedule property. The trial Court has assumed that the amounts were
HC-KAR
paid to the three sisters under the relinquishment deeds were from the nucleus created from the suit schedule property.
7. It was for the plaintiff to plead and prove the existence of such nucleus and establish that the payments made under the relinquishment deeds were out of the joint family funds. In the absence of any evidence establishing the said fact, the finding recorded by the learned Trial Court cannot be sustained.
8. The relinquishment deeds executed by the three sisters in favour of the appellant/defendant No.1 would suggest that they have given up their share in the property in favour of the appellant/defendant No.1 alone and the plaintiff would not be entitled to the partition of share relinquished by three sisters in favour of the appellant/defendant No.1.
9. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the plaintiff/respondent No.1 would be entitled only to her share in the suit schedule property. Accordingly, we pass the following:
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed in part.
HC-KAR
ii. The judgment and decree dated 05.12.2013 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, K.G.F is modified to the extent that the plaintiff/respondent No.1 is declared entitled to 1/5th share in the suit schedule property. iii. Let a preliminary decree be drawn in terms of the aforesaid order. The proceedings for passing of the final decree shall be done by the Trial Court in accordance with law. iv. Insofar as the direction regarding mesne profits payable to the extent of her share is concerned, the impugned judgment is confirmed.
Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE
Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE
RKA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19