LAWS(KAR)-2020-1-290

VENKATAPPA AND ORS. Vs. AKKANAGAMMA AND ORS.

Decided On January 09, 2020
Venkatappa And Ors. Appellant
V/S
Akkanagamma And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the plaintiffs calling in question the order dated 22-11-2013 passed in O.S.No.170/2011 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Nelamangala, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiffs is rejected on an application filed by the defendant No.5 under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC, on the ground that there was no cause of action for the plaintiffs to file the present suit.

(2.) It is seen from the plaint filed in O.S.No.170/2011 that the plaintiffs claimed title in respect of Sy.No.15 of Giriyanapalya Village, Somapura Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk, having purchased in terms of a sale deed dated 26.04.1955. It is claimed that the earlier suit filed by the plaintiffs in O.S.No.512/2009 before the Civil Judge and JMFC., Nelamangala, in respect of Sy.No.6/2 of Giriyinapalya against defendant Nos.1 to 4 for declaration of title was decreed in terms of the judgment and decree dated 03.12.2010. In gross contempt of the Decree in O.S.No.512/2009, the defendant Nos.1 to 4 have sold the land bearing Sy.No.6/2 of Giriyanapalya Village, Sompura Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk to defendant No.5 in terms of a sale deed dated 24.01.2011.

(3.) The application filed by the defendant No.5 under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC., essentially discloses that the plaintiffs claim to have purchased Sy.No.15 of Giriyanapalya under the sale deed dated 26.04.1955 but the present suit is filed in respect of Sy.No.6/2 of Giriyanapalya. It is stated that the defendant No.5 had purchased Sy.No.6/2 from the defendant Nos.1 to 4. The plaintiffs filed their objections to the application. The trial Court took note of the survey number mentioned in the sale deed dated 26.04.1955 as well as the decree in O.S. No.512/2009, the RTC extract concerning Sy.No.6/2 which stood in the name of defendant No.1 and thus, held that while the sale deed dated 26.04.1955 related to Sy. No.15 of Giriyanapalya, the plaintiffs could not lay a claim to the land in Sy. No.6/2 and thus, felt that there was no cause of action for the plaintiffs to file the present suit.