DNYANESHWAR Vs. PARTAPSINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT appeal is filed by the 1st defendant in O.S. No. 350/1997 which was pending on the file of the III Addl. Civil Judge, (Jr. Dn.), Belgaum.

(2.) 1st respondent herein is the plaintiff and other respondents were defendant Nos. 2 and 3 in the said suit. Parties will be referred to as plaintiff and defendants 1 to 3 as per the ranking given in the trial Court.

(3.) DEFENDANT No. 1 alone contested the suit by denying all the material averments. According to him plaintiff and defendant Nos. 2 and 3 did not spend any amount in respect of repairing the latrines as per the direction of Municipal Corporation and therefore, he has kept the latrine under his lock. He has denied the erection of poles at points 'BI' and has averred that there were earlier wooden poles and he has removed them and in their place has fixed iron poles with ACC sheets after replacing the damages sheets. It is his case that he has in no way created obstruction to the common passage Hence, he prayed for dismissal of the suit.