P. KISHORE KUMAR Vs. VITTAL K. PATKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil appeal arises from the judgment and decree dtd. 29/11/2010 rendered by the Karnataka High Court, whereby an appeal under sec. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ("CPC", hereafter) was allowed, resulting in restoration of the decree passed by the Trial Court and setting aside of the first appellate decree dismissing the suit of the plaintiff - respondent ("plaintiff", hereafter).

(2.) The factual matrix of the case, insofar as is relevant for the purpose of a decision on this appeal, is set out hereinbelow:

(3.) Learned senior counsel for the defendant, Mr. A Diwakara, highlighted the dissatisfaction recorded by the High Court with the evidence adduced by the plaintiff, and stressed that in view of the same, the Court could not have held the plaintiff to establish a better title than the defendant, more so when the Court itself recorded the fact that the grant of occupancy rights in favour of the plaintiff's vendor under sec. 9A of the Act was contrary to its import. It was argued by him that the plaintiff's vendor being a purchaser, could not have applied as an "occupant" under the provisions of the Act, such application being restricted only to tenants. The Commissioner's order categorically recorded that the plaintiff's vendor was not a tenant at the time of vesting of the land; therefore, the order could not, by any stretch of imagination, be interpreted to vest occupancy rights in the plaintiff's vendor.