M RAMAIAH Vs. MORASANDRA MUNIYAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is before this Court assailing the judgment dated 07.12.2011 passed in O.S. No. 5210/2009. The appellant herein is the plaintiff and had alleged that the defendant therein was interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. The defendant did not choose to enter appearance despite issue of Court summons. It is no doubt true that the summons was not served personally on the defendant but the notice had been taken out by paper publication. Accordingly, defendant was placed exparte and the matter was proceeded further.

(2.) THE Court below while considering the case putforth by the appellant has arrived at the conclusion that the documents produced by the plaintiff is insufficient to establish the claim over the property. In any event, in the instant case the prayer made was only for permanent injunction and as such, the Court below at the first instance was required to come to a conclusion as to whether the plaintiff was in possession of the property and as to whether there was interference with regard to possession. However, without commenting on the documents produced to establish right over the property, insofar as possession and the interference alleged to have been made by the defendant, I am also of the opinion that the plaintiff has not established these aspects of the matter before the Court below.