NTI HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. Vs. KEMPAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the first defendant's appeal. The present respondent No.1 as a plaintiff had instituted a suit against the present appellant - NTI Housing Co-operative Society Ltd. (hereinafter for brevity referred to as "the Society") and present respondent No.2 and respondent No.3, arraigning them as the defendant No.1, defendant No.2 and defendant No.3 respectively, in O.S.No.2750/2012, in the Court of the learned XXIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-30), Bangalore (hereinafter for brevity referred to as "the Trial Court"), seeking the relief of permanent injunction, restraining the defendants or their agents, servants, henchmen, workmen, officials or any one on their behalf from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties or any part of it or from dispossessing the plaintiff from any portion of the suit schedule properties without due process of law.

(2.) The summary of the plaint of the plaintiff in the Trial Court was that, she is the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties bearing Survey No.85/1, measuring 01 Acre 06 Guntas and Survey No.85/2, measuring 33 Guntas (in total measuring an extent of 01 Acre 39 Guntas), which are the adjacent properties and abutting to each other and situated at Byatarayanapura Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. The said properties were originally owned by the husband of the plaintiff by name Sri.B. Narayanappa. After his death on the date 12/4/2007, the plaintiff, as the Manager and Kartha of the family, succeeded to the same and all the revenue records stood transferred in her name. The said lands had already been converted from agriculture to non-agriculture purpose during the life time of Sri.B. Narayanappa, the husband of the plaintiff.

(3.) In response to the summons served upon them, the defendant No.1 - Society (appellant herein) and defendant No.2 and defendant No. 3 (respondent No.2 and respondent No.3 herein) appeared through their respective counsels and filed their independent Written Statements.