(1.) This appeal by defendants 1 and 2 is directed against the judgment arid decree dt. 10.7.1974 passed by the Civil Judge, Bagalkot, in RA. No. 485 of 1967, on his file, dismissing the Appeal Of the defendants on confirming the judgment and decree dt. 31.7.1997 passed by the Munsiff, Hungund, in CS No. 82 of 1965, on his file, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff as prayed for.
(2.) It is the case of the plaintiff that the suit properties were formerly of the ownership of his uncle Andanayya Veerayya Math and that he was enjoying the suit properties, they being in his possession. He effected a gift deed in his favour under the original of Ex.124 on 17.6.1963, Since the defendants are disputing his title, he instituted the suit for declaration of his title his legal status acquired under the gift deed as owner.
(3.) The suit was resisted by defendants 1 and 2 and defendant-3 remained absent and was placed ex -par e. According to the contending defendats 1 and 2, the gift was the result of fraud and undue influence. It was illegal because one of the properties was A fragment. They further contended that the gift deed was executed under suspicious circumstances, because nothing was provided for the wire, viz., defendant-1 in the suit., and all the properties were gifted away in favour of the plaintiff.