BYRAIAH Vs. DODDA MAYANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter is listed for admission. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.

(2.) This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree dtd. 21/10/2016 passed in R.A.No.16/2013 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ramanagara.

(3.) The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiff before the Trial Court is that he had purchased the suit schedule property measuring 142 feet east to west and 67 feet north to south through a sale deed dtd. 30/1/1984. The schedule property was situated in the survey number but in the sale deed, katha number was mentioned, hence, a rectification deed was executed on 25/2/1985. It is further contended that since from the date of sale deed, the plaintiff is in possession of the suit schedule property. Defendant No.1 is the daughter of Byrappa and one of the vendor of the plaintiff, defendant No.2 is the son of brother of Byrappa and defendant No.3 is the wife of defendant No.2. The defendants though have no manner of right, title or interest over the suit schedule property, are trying to interfere with his possession denying his title thus, the suit was filed against the defendants seeking for the relief of declaration and injunction.