P. ANJANAPPA (D) BY LRS versus A.P. NANJUNDAPPA & ORS.

P. ANJANAPPA (D) BY LRS versus A.P. NANJUNDAPPA & ORS.

The Court held that Ex.D-15 (09.11.1956) and Ex.D-16 (14.09.1967), being duly proved registered release deeds supported by consideration and corroborated by subsequent conduct, validly severed plaintiff no.2 and defendant no.3 from the coparcenary; that the unregistered palupatti (Ex.D-17 with Ex.D-17(a)) is admissible for collateral purposes to prove severance of joint status as from 11.02.1972 and to explain subsequent separate possession and enjoyment; and on that basis the partitionable pool is Schedule A and items 1–16 of Schedule C, with shares fixed (plaintiff no.1 8/21, defendant no.5 8/21, each daughter-branch 1/21) while Schedule B and item 17 of Schedule C are excluded and held...

Parties
Appellant: P. Anjanappa (D) By Lrs; Respondent: A.P. Nanjundappa & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
06 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal No. 3934 of 2006 / Final Judgment on Appeal From High Court (judgment Dated 30.08.2005)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment and decree dated 30.08.2005 and preliminary decree dated 19.08.1994 set aside; fresh preliminary decree substituted
Legal Topics
Partition, Joint Family Property, Registered Release Deeds, Palupatti (partition Deed), Collateral Evidence, Severance of Coparcenary, Share Computation, Registration Requirements, Estoppel
Family Law Property Law Succession Law Evidence Law Partition Joint Family Property Registered Release Deeds Palupatti (partition Deed) +5 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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P. Anjanappa (D) By Lrs

Appellant

A.P. Nanjundappa & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal No. 3934 of 2006 / Final Judgment on Appeal From High Court (judgment Dated 30.08.2005)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the registered release deeds dated 09.11.1956 (Ex.D-15) and 14.09.1967 (Ex.D-16) are valid and binding and their effect on membership and share entitlements of plaintiff no.2 and defendant no.3
  2. 2 Whether the document dated 11.02.1972 styled as the palupatti (Ex.D-17 with schedule Ex.D-17(a)) can be relied upon for collateral purposes to establish severance of status and subsequent possession and enjoyment
  3. 3 Consequent identification of the partitionable estate and computation of shares inter se, including treatment of Schedule B property and item no.17 of Schedule C and preservation of co-ownership of defendant no.6

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that Ex.D-15 (09.11.1956) and Ex.D-16 (14.09.1967), being duly proved registered release deeds supported by consideration and corroborated by subsequent conduct, validly severed plaintiff no.2 and defendant no.3 from the coparcenary; that the unregistered palupatti (Ex.D-17 with Ex.D-17(a)) is admissible for collateral purposes to prove severance of joint status as from 11.02.1972 and to explain subsequent separate possession and enjoyment; and on that basis the partitionable pool is Schedule A and items 1–16 of Schedule C, with shares fixed (plaintiff no.1 8/21, defendant no.5 8/21, each daughter-branch 1/21) while Schedule B and item 17 of Schedule C are excluded and held...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment and decree dated 30.08.2005 and preliminary decree dated 19.08.1994 set aside; fresh preliminary decree substituted

Orders

  • Ex.D-15 and Ex.D-16 are declared valid and binding releases; Ex.D-17 read with Ex.D-17(a) admitted for collateral purposes establishing severance of joint status with effect from 11.02.1972
  • Partitionable pool consists of Schedule A and items 1 to 16 of Schedule C; shares fixed: plaintiff no.1 8/21, defendant no.5 8/21, each of five daughters' branches 1/21 with predeceased daughter's 1/21 in favour of defendant no.2; plaintiff no.2 and defendant no.3 take none