31 March 2009
Supreme Court
Download

FAKKIRAPPA BASAPPA BHAIRAPPANAVAR Vs H.F. BHAIRAPPANAVAR (D) BY LRS.

Case number: C.A. No.-004912-004912 / 2002
Diary number: 21166 / 2001
Advocates: VIJAY KUMAR Vs


1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.4912 OF 2002

Fakkirappa Basappa Bhairappanavar & Ors.      ...Appellant(s)

Versus

H.F. Bhairappanavar (Dead) By L.Rs. & Anr.   ...Respondent(s)

O  R  D  E  R

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The  suit  for  partition,  possession  and  mesne  profits  filed  by

Hanumanthappa Fakkirappa Bhairappanavar, who is now represented by his L.Rs.

was dismissed by the Trial Court by recording a finding that the plaintiff has failed to

prove that his family and defendants are still a joint family; that plot Nos. 1, 2 and 3

were  purchased  from  joint  family  funds  and  that  V.P.C.  No.  276  house  was

constructed on it  out  of  joint  family  funds.   The Trial  Court further  held  that  a

partition had taken place in the family in 1950 which was reduced in writing in the

year 1960 and that the disputed properties are self acquired properties of defendant

no.1.  On appeal, the High Court reversed the findings recorded by the Trial Court

and decreed the suit.  

From a bare perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that while reversing

the order of the Trial Court, the High Court has taken into consideration only two

documents i.e. Exhibits P-21 and P-22 and ignored other documentary as well as oral

evidence adduced by the parties.

...2/-

2

- 2 -  

It is well-settled that while exercising the power of the first appellate court

which is the final court of fact, the High Court is obliged to consider the entire oral

and documentary evidence produced by the parties and record independent findings

on all the issues.  Since, in the present case, the High Court has failed to consider the

evidence produced by the parties in its entirety, the impugned order is liable to be set

aside.

Accordingly,  the appeal is allowed,  impugned order is set aside and the

matter is remitted to the High Court for fresh disposal of the appeal in accordance

with law.

No costs.

......................J.       [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.       [G.S. SINGHVI]

New Delhi, March 31, 2009.