Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 9 views

    I SSUES

    Uploaded by

    cpp.advocates

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    I SSUES

    Uploaded by

    cpp.advocates
    9 views4 pages

    Original Title

    iSSUES

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    9 views4 pages

    I SSUES

    Uploaded by

    cpp.advocates

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 4

    ISSUES

    1. Whether the plaintiff proves that the suit schedule property is


    liable to partition as bar under Section 14 of Hindu Succession
    Act?
    2. Whether the plaintiff proves that the court fee paid by the
    plaintiff is sufficient?
    3. Whether the suit filed by the plaintiff is maintainable or not?

    IN THE COURT OF THE CITY CIVIL JUDGE AT BANGALORE


    (CCH-64)

    O.S. NO.2887/2012
    BETWEEN:

    Smt. Shyamala Vatsa and others Plaintiffs

    AND

    Smt. Shashikala R. Nayak and others Defendants

    AFFIDAVIT

    I, R Varadaraj Naik, S/o Late: G Ramdas Nayak aged about 58


    years, residing at No.6, S.K.R. road, Basavanagudi, Bangalore-
    560004, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows: -
    1. I submit that I am the third defendant in the above case. I am
    aware of the fact and circumstances of the case and
    accordingly I am swearing to this affidavit.

    2. I submit that the plaintiff filed above suit seek judgement and
    decree granting 1/6th share to each of the Plaintiff with
    respect to schedule property, by effecting a partition by meats
    and bounds through process of court to each of the Plaintiffs,
    so secure the ends of justice and equity.

    3. I submit that at para 6 of my written statement, I contend


    that schedule property is not a partible property at all. Hence,
    the suit is not maintainable. I also sought that the
    maintainability of the suit may be tried as a preliminary issue.
    Where the maintainability of the suit is question before the
    court. The issue required to be heard in this regard. In respect
    of 2nd Issues concern in para 9 of my written statement I
    contend that the plaintiffs have valued the suit relief under
    section 35(2) of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suit Valuation
    Act, 1958.as contemplated under section 35(2) of the
    Karnataka Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act the Plaintiff
    require to pay the court fee on the market value of the
    property. Since the plaintiffs have fails to establish they are
    the co-owners of the suit schedule property.

    4. I submit that I am given to understand the issues will arise for


    consideration based on the Plaint averment aswell as the
    written statement.

    5. When I clearly contend in my written statement above these


    aspects the issue in relation to the same it is required to be
    framed on this regard.

    6. I submit that though I raised this contention in my written


    statement at the time of getting ready for my evidence and
    verifying the papers I came to know that issues on these
    aspect the court have not framed any issues

    7. I submit that the power confirmed under Order 14 Rule 5 an is


    absolute. The Court may at any time before passing a decree
    amend the issues or frame additional issues on such terms as
    it thinks fit, and all such amendments or additional issues as
    may be necessary for determining the matters in controversy
    between the parties. The additional issues which I sorted this
    application is very much required for the adjudication of the
    dispute and matter in controversy. The suit itself is not
    maintainable and plaintiffs are not the co-owners of the suit
    schedule property. Suit in present form is not at all
    maintainable. In addition to that the issues sorted in this
    application are very much require for the purpose of
    disproving the case of the plaintiffs

    8. I submit that despite of due diligence I was unable to file this


    application at earliest point of time. Delay if any in filling the
    above application may kindly be condoned.
    9. I state that, if the above application is allowed, no
    hardship or injury will be caused to the Plaintiff. On the
    other hand, if the same is not allowed, the defendant will
    be put to great hardship and injury.

    WHEREFORE, I humbly pray that the above application may


    kindly be allow as prayed for, in the interest of justice and equity.

    Identified by me
    DEPONENT

    Advocate.

    Bangalore
    Date: 30.07.2024

    You might also like