ADIVEPPA & ORS versus BHIMAPPA & ANR.

ADIVEPPA & ORS versus BHIMAPPA & ANR.

The plaintiffs failed to prove that Schedule 'B' and 'C' properties were self-acquired, and failed to rebut the presumption of jointness and ancestral nature of the properties for want of evidence. Concurrent findings by the trial court and High Court that partition took place and was acted upon are not perverse and are upheld.

Parties
Plaintiff: Adiveppa; Plaintiff: Yamanappa; Defendant: Bhimappa; Defendant: Gundavva
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
06 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Before Supreme Court After High Court Dismissal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Joint Family Property, Partition, Burden of Proof
Property Law Hindu Law Joint Family Property Partition Burden of Proof

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adiveppa

Plaintiff

Yamanappa

Plaintiff

Bhimappa

Defendant

Gundavva

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Before Supreme Court After High Court Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the properties described in Schedule 'B' and 'C' are self-acquired properties of the plaintiffs
  2. 2 Whether partition took place in respect of Schedule 'D' properties and whether they continued as ancestral properties

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs failed to prove that Schedule 'B' and 'C' properties were self-acquired, and failed to rebut the presumption of jointness and ancestral nature of the properties for want of evidence. Concurrent findings by the trial court and High Court that partition took place and was acted upon are not perverse and are upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No merit in the appeal; concurrent findings of lower courts upheld; appeal is accordingly dismissed.