M GOPALA REDDY vs M S SHIVAMURTHY — 53/2026
Case under Under Section 96 of Cpc. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 16th April 2026.
R.A. - Regular Appeals
CNR: KABR010014812026
Filing Number
59/2026
Filing Date
12-Mar-2026
Registration No
53/2026
Registration Date
13-Mar-2026
Court
PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL
Judge
537-I Addl.district And Sessions Judge
Decision Date
16-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 18-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.M GOPALA REDDY
Adv. GIRIDHAR S V
Respondent(s)
-
1.M S SHIVAMURTHY
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
16-Apr-2026
OrdersView PDF
Case Summary: RA No. 53/2026 Court Decision: The appellate court dismissed M. Gopala Reddy's appeal, upholding the trial court's partition decree that allocated Block-I land to Reddy and Block-II land to Dr. M.S. Shivamurthy. Key Reasoning: The court rejected Reddy's argument that he deserved Block-II because his father-in-law owned adjacent land. The court found both blocks had equal value and measurements, and held that personal convenience cannot determine share allocation in partition cases. The court also upheld the trial judge's decision to allow Shivamurthy (the partition suit initiator) to choose his share first, after finding the Court Commissioner had exceeded jurisdiction by allotting shares rather than merely dividing the property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
16-Apr-2026
Disposed
I Addl.district And Sessions Judge
-
09-Apr-2026
Order
I Addl.district And Sessions Judge
-
26-Mar-2026
Order
I Addl.district And Sessions Judge
-
25-Mar-2026
Arguments.
I Addl.district And Sessions Judge
-
17-Mar-2026
Judgement
I Addl.district And Sessions Judge
-
13-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 53/2026
Case Summary: RA No. 53/2026 Court Decision: The appellate court dismissed M. Gopala Reddy's appeal, upholding the trial court's partition decree that allocated Block-I land to Reddy and Block-II land to Dr. M.S. Shivamurthy. Key Reasoning: The court rejected Reddy's argument that he deserved Block-II because his father-in-law owned adjacent land. The court found both blocks had equal value and measurements, and held that personal convenience cannot determine share allocation in partition cases. The court also upheld the trial judge's decision to allow Shivamurthy (the partition suit initiator) to choose his share first, after finding the Court Commissioner had exceeded jurisdiction by allotting shares rather than merely dividing the property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts