YEMANAPPA DUDAPPA MARVE Vs. YELLUBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned First Additional Civil Judge, Belgaum, in Regular appeal No. 17/1982 dated 18/12/1982 confirming the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court in O. S. No. 55/1975 dated 05/01/ 1982.

(2.) THE essential facts of the case leading up to this appeal are as follows: the parties would be referred to, with reference to their rank before the Trial Court.

(3.) THE plaintiff filed O. S. No. 550/1975 seeking for declaration that plaintiff is the owner of the suit schedule property and to restrain the defendant from obstructing with the possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property comprised in Sy. No. 121/6 and also western half of house No. 673 in Rayatgalli, Madhavpur, Belgaum. It is averred in the plaint that she was given half share of the suit land half of the other land bearing Sy. No. 809 of Yallur Village and the suit house towards her maintenance under an agreement by her father-in-law as her husband pre-deceased his father and subsequently by agreement, she gave up her half share in Yallur land Sy. No. 809 in exchange for remaining half of the suit land in sy. No. 121/6, as a result of which, she came to be given the entire suit land in Sy. No. 121/6 and the suit house and she has been in actual possession and enjoyment of the suit property in lieu of her maintenance and after coming into force of the Hindu Succession act, she being in actual possession of the property became the absolute owner of the suit property and the plaintiff is in possession for more than 12 years and has perfected title by adverse possession and the defendant who has no right or title what so ever in the property tried to interfere with the possession of the property and also sent representation to the Municipal Commissioner complaining about the entries made in the revenue records and she went in revision to the Divisional Commissioner and the Divisional commissioner dismissed the said revision on 17/11/1975 and her name stood deleted in the Municipal records in respect of the suit land and taking advantage of the deletion, the defendant threatened to interfere with the possession and wherefore the suit.