N. V. PUSHPAMMA Vs. G. V. NAGARAJ

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree dtd. 30/6/2017 passed in R.A.No.213/2011 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Chickballapur.

(3.) The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiff before the Trial Court is that the father of the plaintiff and the plaintiff got the suit schedule property in terms of the release deed dtd. 21/8/1972 and the defendant had purchased a portion of the 'A' schedule property on 4/5/1987 except the property measuring 20 x 20 feet which was given to the plaintiff and his father vide release deed dtd. 21/8/1972 and the said sale was made by the father of the plaintiff and the plaintiff was not a party to the said sale deed and the defendant in the said suit, appeared and contested the matter contending that earlier, the plaintiff had filed the suit in O.S.No.572/192 seeking the relief of permanent injunction and the said suit was dismissed and against the said judgment of the Trial Court, an appeal was filed and the said appeal was also dismissed. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of the said appeal, second appeal was filed and the second appeal was also dismissed with a liberty to seek for the relief of declaration so as advised in respect of the property in which the plaintiff is in possession excluding the property covered under the sale deed of the appellant herein that is at Ex.D4 and the Trial Court considering the evidence of the PW1 and DW1 and documentary evidence at Ex.P1 to P11 and Ex.D1 to D12, decreed the suit in part declaring that the plaintiff is the owner of 'B' schedule property and dismissed the suit seeking the relief for share in the suit schedule property. Being aggrieved by the judgment of the Trial Court, the plaintiff has filed R.A.No.213/2011 and the First Appellate Court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree with respect to 'A' schedule property and declared that the plaintiff is entitled for partition and separate possession of half share in 'A' schedule property and further directed the defendant to make partition in 'A' schedule property and deliver the possession of half share to the plaintiff. Hence, the present second appeal is filed by the defendant.