ROTARY CLUB EDUCATION SOCIETY Vs. TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff in O.S. No. 60/1996 on the file of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and Prl. J.M.F.C., Tarikere, has come in this second appeal impugning the concurrent findings of both the Courts below in reversing their prayer for declaration. Admittedly, the suit in CS. No. 60/1996 was filed for the relief of declaration and permanent injunction in respect of property bearing old assessment No. 2552/2561 and new assessment No. 2933/2742 situated at Thyagaraj Nagar, Tarikere, measuring to an extent of 140' x 130', which consists of Nursery School, Rotary Hail,. Play Ground, Tennis Court and other structures situated within the aforesaid extent of land. In the original suit, the defendant namely, the Town Municipal Council accepted the possession of the aforesaid land as licencee and denied the ownership of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property. In the said proceedings based on the pleadings, issues were framed and evidence was adduced. The plaintiff while adducing oral evidence relied upon 22 documents, which are basically Assessment Register Extract, Endorsement, Plans that was drawn while putting up construction of the building presently standing on the suit property, Building Licence and various documents. However, no title deed was produced to show that the title' to the suit schedule property stands in the name of the plaintiff -Rotary Club. It is also contended in the pleadings as well as in the evidence that the suit schedule property was previously in the possession and enjoyment of Official Club of Tarikere, which subsequently taken over by the plaintiff -Rotary Club of Tarikere and as such, the said property has become absolute property of the plaintiff.

(2.) PER contra, the evidence that is led by the defendant relying upon Exs. D.1 to D.20 discloses that whatever the right and title, which are tried to set up by the defendant over the suit schedule property is in the nature of licence and the licence is for the enjoyment of the suit property also to make development, but title is not confirmed over the said property in favour of the plaintiff.

(3.) BEING aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff preferred an appeal in R.A. No. 42/2009 on the file of Principal District Judge, Chikmagalur, insofar as rejection of his suit for the relief of declaration. In the said proceedings on re -appreciation of the pleadings and oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Lower Appellate Court has rightly come to the conclusion that the plaintiff no doubt, is continuing in possession of the suit schedule property having secured the same through transfer from the Official Club and the transfer i.e. made in favour of plaintiff by the erstwhile Official Club is only the licence right and not the absolute title to the suit schedule property and has proceeded to accept the judgment and decree rendered by the trial Court in granting relief of permanent injunction in favour of the plaintiff However while doing so, refused to interfere with the findings of the trial Court so far as title of the suit schedule property, which was denied by the trial Court. On going through the concurrent findings of both the Courts below, this Court is of the opinion that the plaintiff in the original suit has miserably failed to demonstrate that the title to the suit schedule property is conveyed in its favour by the erstwhile owner, Official Club, which according to the defendant in the original suit is the licence that was granted in favor of the Official Club to be in possession and enjoyment of the said land with permission, to put up school building and club building for its use and enjoyment. On going through the same, it is seen that no grounds are made out by the plaintiff in the original suit, who is appellant herein, to consider admission of this second appeal, inasmuch as no substantial question of law arises for consideration in this appeal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. Consequently, the judgment and decree of both the Courts below is hereby affirmed.