SHIVAPPA KARBASAPPA KARADLGUDDA Vs. HANUMANTHAPPA KARIBASAPPA KARADIGUDDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiffs second appeal. They brought the suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. It was alleged by the plaintiffs that the suit schedule property bearing S. No. 42/2-A of Tarihal Village in Hubli Taluk was purchased by them by a deed of sale executed on 17-6-1967 paying consideration in that behalf in the sum of Rs. 1000/-. The plaintiffs used to work as labourers in the construction of buildings and also work on lands. Plaintiff No. 3 was working as a coolie or hamal in the shop of M/s. Nulvi of Hubli. Therefore, the plaintiffs earned independent income and were able to purchase the property viz., the suit schedule property. The defendant who was their brother, a literate, taking advantage of their ignorance and illiteracy, on the death of their father obtained their signatures on blank papers on the pretext that they were required to report the death of their father to the Village Accountant and made use of the same to get the mutation entry in the revenue registers changed in respect of the suit schedule property. Therefore, a declaration was sought that the plaintiffs were the absolute owners of the said property and that the defendant be restrained from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same.

(2.) The defendant contested the claim inter alia denying most of the allegations, but with specific pleading that the property in question claimed by the plaintiffs to be their self-acquired property fell to his share at a partition that took place in the year 1982 in accordance with Vatani Fathra and he had been in lawful possession and enjoyment of the same since and the suit of the plaintiffs was misconceived and therefore liable to be dismissed.

(3.) The trial court on such pleadings framed as many as four issues as follows: