PADMARAJU Vs. ADUBAKAR ISMAIL HODEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dtd. 10/12/2009 of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kumta ('First Appellate Court' for short), reversing the judgment and decree dtd. 13/3/1996 passed by the Civil Judge(Jr.Dn.), Kumta ('trial Court' for short), the plaintiffs are in this Second Appeal.

(2.) The suit is filed for the relief of declaration of title and injunction and in the alternative, the plaintiffs have sought for possession of the suit schedule property. The suit schedule property according to the plaintiffs is Survey No.125/1A1 measuring 14 guntas. The description provided would reveal that the suit property was part of earlier survey No.125/1.

(3.) The subdivision of adjoining survey numbers are also specified in the plaint schedule. As could be seen from the description of shown in the plaint schedule, the suit property is bounded by Survey No.124/1A, 124/1B, 125/1A3, 125/1A4, 125/1A2. The trial Court has appointed a Survey Commissioner to measure the property. The Survey Commissioner has submitted a report and the report is marked as Ex.P15. In the survey report, the Survey Commissioner has identified certain portion to be in possession of the defendants. The report is marked as Ex.P15. Objection was not filed to the report and the Survey Commissioner was not examined. The report is marked at Ex.P15 and the same is part and parcel of the record.