K. APPAJI Vs. V. SRINIVASA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are heard and disposed of by this common judgment. The appellants are common.

(2.) The parties are referred to by their rank before the trial court in narrating the facts of the case and in the course of the judgment.

(3.) The defendant had filed written statement to deny the plaint averments. It was on the other hand asserted that the defendant was the owner of the portion of the suit property marked with the letters 'MODEFQ'. This was purchased by the father of the defendant under a sale deed dated 8.2.1953. After his death there was said to have been a partition amongst the defendant and his brothers and the above portion had fallen to the share of the defendant. It was vacant land and he had applied to the local authority for permission to construct a building. The plaintiffs are said to have objected to the same. The authorities had then conducted an enquiry and having found that the defendant as the owner was entitled to construct the building had granted license and sanction of the plan for construction. The said order had been challenged by the plaintiffs in a revision petition and the same had been dismissed. It is claimed that it is thereafter that the plaintiffs had encroached on the suit property and constructed the cart shed. It was hence contended that the plaintiffs had come to court by suppressing the true facts.