LAWS(KAR)-1983-2-15

CHENNA REDDY Vs. BHIMANNA

Decided On February 17, 1983
CHENNA REDDY Appellant
V/S
BHIMANNA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by Chenna Reddy, son of Hanmanth reddy, Sarpanch, Chimmanchod. Village Panchayat, Taluk Chincholi, Dist. Gulbarga, (defendant), is directed against the judgment and de cree dt. 11-12-1975 passed by the Civil Judge, Gulburga, in RA No. 172 of 1975, on his file, allowing the appeal, on reversing the judgment and decree dated 5-9-1975 passed by the Munsiff, Chincholi, in OS. No. 60 of 1974, on his file, dismissing the suit of the plaintiff for injunction.

(2.) The plaintiff instituted the suit against the present appellant, Sarpanch of the Chimmanchod Village Panchayat, for injunction. The plaintiff, according to him, is the owner in possession of the open space, measuring 78' north to south and 14' cast to west. The plaintiff purchased the suit open space from his brother Nagappa. OH 29-10-1971. After purchasing the- said space, he applied for permission to the village Panchayat to construct a building and submitted his application on 4-11-1971 and 4-12-1971. The Secretary of the Panchayat received those applications and acknowledged the same. Since the dates of the applications the Panchayat did not take any action in that regard. The plaintiff waited for more than two months and not, receiving any reply from the Panchayat, he began to construct the house in the open space assuming that, permission was granted under S. 53 of the Karnataka Village Panchayats and Local Boards Act, 1959 On 10-10-1974, however, when the plaintiff was constructing the house, for defendant sent his peon to stop the were' Hence, the plaintiff was compelled to institute the suit against the defendant.

(3.) The defendant resisted the suit. He contended that the plaintiff was not the owner of the open space. He further contended that the plaintiff was called upon to produce the documents; but, he refused to receive the notice. He denied that no order was passed by the Panchayat within two months. Hence, he resisted the suit. He also contended that the suit was not tenable against the Panchayat, in the way it was instituted.