RAJAMMA Vs. N. MURARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter is posted for admission and since notice has been served on all the respondents, with the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing. This appeal is filed under Sec. 96 of CPC challenging the judgment and decree dtd. 1/2/2020 passed by III Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in O.S.No.587/2013, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff has been dismissed.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Trial Court in original suit.

(3.) The plaintiff has filed the suit for permanent injunction on the ground that the plaintiff has purchased the property by registered sale deed dtd. 1/7/1974 from one Chandrappa. Since the defendants are trying to interfere with plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment over the suit schedule property, the plaintiff earlier had filed the suit in O.S.No.5273/2001, which came be dismissed on 30/8/2011. Being aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff filed RFA No.2140/2011 before this Court. This Court by judgment dtd. 31/1/2012 has affirmed the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court with liberty to the appellant-plaintiff to file a comprehensive suit seeking declaration of the title to the cart-way as included in the sale deed. Thereafter, plaintiff has filed the present suit i.e., O.S.No.587/2013 seeking declaration and injunction. On service of suit summons, defendant No.1 has filed the written statement denying the contents of the plaint and they are in possession by virtue of Agreement to Sell and Power Of Attorney and Affidavit dtd. 31/7/1992. The defendant Nos.2 to 4 have not filed written statement. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Trial Court has framed following issues: