ANGADI CHANDRANNA versus SHANKAR & ORS.

ANGADI CHANDRANNA versus SHANKAR & ORS.

The High Court erred in re-appreciating evidence and framing a non-substantial question of law under Section 100/103 CPC; the First Appellate Court had considered the evidence and plausibly concluded that Defendant No.1 purchased the suit property in 1989 with funds including a loan from DW3, and plaintiffs failed to prove a joint family nucleus or that the purchase was from joint family funds; consequently the suit property is self-acquired and the sale to Defendant No.2 is valid.

Parties
Appellant / Defendant No.2: Angadi Chandranna; Respondents / Plaintiffs (sons and Daughters of Defendant No.1): Shankar & Ors.; Defendant No.1: C. Jayaramappa
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (civil Appeal No. 5401 of 2025) / Appeal to the Supreme Court From the Judgment and Order Dated 12.08.2021 of the High Court of Karnataka in RSA No. 1417 of 2006
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Property, Ancestral Property, Self Acquired Property, Joint Family Property, Sale Deed, Partition Deed, Partition, Possession, Substantial Questions of Law, Re Appreciation of Evidence, Crucial Fact, Income From Nucleus Fund, Joint Family Funds, Doctrine of Blending of Self Acquired Property With Joint Family
Code of Civil Procedure Hindu Law Property Law Property Ancestral Property Self Acquired Property Joint Family Property Sale Deed +9 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Angadi Chandranna

Appellant / Defendant No.2

Shankar & Ors.

Respondents / Plaintiffs (sons and Daughters of Defendant No.1)

C. Jayaramappa

Defendant No.1

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (civil Appeal No. 5401 of 2025) / Appeal to the Supreme Court From the Judgment and Order Dated 12.08.2021 of the High Court of Karnataka in RSA No. 1417 of 2006

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the suit property was ancestral or self-acquired property of Defendant No.1
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in re-appreciation of evidence and in framing/deciding a so-called substantial question of law under Section 100 CPC
  3. 3 Whether the doctrine of blending applied and burden of proof regarding existence of joint family nucleus

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court erred in re-appreciating evidence and framing a non-substantial question of law under Section 100/103 CPC; the First Appellate Court had considered the evidence and plausibly concluded that Defendant No.1 purchased the suit property in 1989 with funds including a loan from DW3, and plaintiffs failed to prove a joint family nucleus or that the purchase was from joint family funds; consequently the suit property is self-acquired and the sale to Defendant No.2 is valid.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order of the High Court of Karnataka dated 12.08.2021 in RSA No.1417 of 2006 is set aside
  • Judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court (Regular Appeal No.291 of 2002) dated 21.02.2006 is restored