BOBAMMA Vs. T TEIMMIAH
LAWS(KAR)-1956-1-8
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Decided on January 17,1956

BOBAMMA Appellant
VERSUS
T TEIMMIAH Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

SURAJ JOTE KUER V. ATTAR KUMARI [REFERRED]
GANAPATHY NAIDU V. JEEVAMMAL [REFERRED]
MANABAI V. MT. CHENDANBAI [REFERRED]
RAMA APPA PATIL VS. SAKHU DATTU GHARAL [REFERRED]
LAKSHMI AMMAL AND ORS. VS. THANGAVEL ASARI [REFERRED]
BANGARU REDDI VS. MANGAMMAL ALIAS JAYALAKSHMI AMMAL [REFERRED]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This is a second appeal preferred by the appellants defendants 1 and 2 against the judgment and decree of the learned subordinate Judge, Mandya, in Begular Appeal No. 41 of 1949-50 confirming those of the learned Munsiff, Srirangapatna, in original Suit No. 97 of 1948-49.
(2.)The facts that have given rise to this appeal are briefly as follows: the respondent was the plaintiff and the appellants were defendants 1 and 2 in the lower Court. Plaintiff's suit was for a declaration of his title to the schedule property, for possession and for the recovery of mesne profits. Admittedly the schedule land is the joint family property of one Javarappa who is said to have died during the early part of 1935. He left two widows by name Boramma (who is the 2nd appellant in this case) and another Lakahmidevamma, a son (defendant 1,) and a daughter Kempamma, both born of the 2nd defendant, and a widowed mother who was also known as Boramma. Javarappa's mother Boramma and his daughter Kempamma are also stated to be dead. It is alleged that Javarappa's mother Boramma had a sister also by name Boramma, The latter Boramma is said to have died leaving a son by name Venkatappa who is examined as P. W. 8 and a daughter whose husband is stated to be thimmiah the present plaintiff. It is further alleged that venkatappa had a son by name Srinivasiah whose wife is said to be one Gowramma. The said Srinivasiah is said to have died in the year 1947 leaving his widow the above mentioned gowramma.
(3.)The case for the plaintiff is that after the death of javarappa, an agreement was arrived at among his two widows, of whom the 2nd defendant is one, his mother Boramma and his son the first defendant, and that the said agreement resulted in a family arrangement evidenced by a registered deed of settlement, of date 12-8-1935, which is marked as Exhibit A in the case.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.