KAMALAMMA Vs. S.T.PUSHPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree dtd. 18/10/2016, passed in R.A.No.54/2014, on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Davanagere and to confirm the judgment and decree dtd. 6/6/2014, passed in O.S.No.33/2009, on the file of the Civil Judge and Judicial First Class Magistrate, Jagalur.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiff before the Trial Court is that the suit schedule property originally belonged to Krishna Reddy and she had purchased the same under registered sale deed dtd. 14/2/1994 for Rs.12,000.00. The suit schedule property mentioned in the sale deed is measuring east-west 40 feet instead of 30 feet. The defendant No.3 has no semblance of right, title and interest over the suit property and in collusion with defendant No.1, she got the khatha of the suit property changed to her name based on the dismissal of the suit filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No.53/2007 against the respondent for permanent injunction. After disposal of the said suit, on the basis of the created documents and without the knowledge of the plaintiff, defendant No.1 has changed the khatha of the suit property to the name of defendant No.3. It is contended by defendant No.3 that by virtue of the inspection made by the Assistant Commissioner, Harapanahalli on 23/8/2003, the property comes within the premises of Jagalur Government Hospital. The property purchased in the auction in 1958 and the suit property are different. The plaintiff got issued notice to the defendants under Sec. 284 of the Municipality Act and called upon them to change the khatha of the suit property in favour of the plaintiff and no action was taken by defendant Nos.1 and 2. Hence, the plaintiff was constrained to file the suit.

(3.) In pursuance of the suit summons, defendant No.1 appeared and filed the written statement. The defendant No.1 denied the allegations made by the plaintiff that the property is purchased under registered sale deed dtd. 14/2/1994. The dismissal of suit in O.S.No.53/2007 is admitted, but the allegations made in the plaint that the khatha of the suit property changed to the name of defendant No.3 on the basis of created document is specifically denied. It is contended that site No.2 measuring 48 x 50 feet situated behind government Hospital bounded on the east - site No.3, west - site No.1, north - conservancy and south - conservancy was sold by the municipality on 23/4/1958 in public auction to Mallikarjunappa. It is contended that in this behalf resolution is passed on 20/6/1958 by Pattana Panchayath. The defendant No.1 has not issued grant certificate to Krishna Reddy. Krishna Reddy had no semblance of right, title and interest in the suit property. On the basis of the false document, the plaintiff has filed the suit. The plaintiff has no right over the suit property on the basis of the sale deed. Hence, prayed to dismiss the suit.