Sri. Bharamappa vs Sri K. Lokeshappa and Others

Ravi Malimath

Defendant No. 1(D) filed an application u/s 151 of CPC for addition of agriculturai land as one of the schedule property in FDP proceedings. It was contended that the property in question was purchased on 21.08.2010 and that the preliminary decree was passed on 20.03.2000. The trial Court therefore held that there was severance of joint family status and after severance of joint family status in the year 1995, the preliminary decree was passed in the year 2000 and the defendant purchased the property in the year 2010. Hence, the same cannot he included and accordingly, the application was rejected. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment in the case of GANDURI KOTESHWARAMMA & ANOTHER VS. CHAKIRI YANADI & ANOTHER REPORTED IN 2011 AIR SCW 6163 in particularly referring to paragraph 17 tc contend that if in the interregnum i.e. after passing of the preliminary decree and before the final decree is passed, the events and supervening circumstances occur necessitating change in shares, there is no impediment for the court to amend the preliminary decree or pass another preliminary decree redetermining the rights and interests of the parties having regard to the changed situation.

The facts involved in the said judgment and the facts involved in the present case are totey different. In the said judgment, what was sought for is for allotment of shares. In the instant case, an addition of property is sought for. In the instant case, the properties were purchased after the preliminary decree passed. That is a fundamental difference. Hence, for the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition being devoid of merits is dismissed.