(1.) THOUGH the appeal is listed for admission, with consent of learned counsel appearing for both the parties, the appeal is taken up for final disposal.
(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the appellants. The present appeal filed under Section 100 of CPC is directed against the concurrent findings given by the Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Gadag in O.S.No.468/1995 and confirmation of the said finding in regular appeal bearing R.A.No.47/2002, which was pending on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and CJM, Gadag.
(3.) THIS is an appeal filed by the unsuccessful defendant Nos.1 and 2 of the said suit. The suit is filed for the relief of declaration of title to the effect that the sale deed dated 11.12.1992 executed by defendant No.2 -Bhimasenanaik in favour of defendant No.1 -Gururaj Vadiraj Balaganur does not bind him and for consequential relief of possession has been decreed by a considered judgment and decree dated 11.02.2002. An appeal filed before the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Gadag in R.A.No.47/2002 under Section 96 of CPC, also came to be dismissed after contest. Concurrent findings of the trial Court as well as the appellate Court have been called in question by filing an appeal under Section 100 of CPC. Several grounds have been urged in the appeal memo. Respondent No.1 herein was the plaintiff in the said suit. Respondent Nos.3 to 7 were defendant Nos.3 to 6 in the said case. Appellants were the defendant Nos.1 and 2 in the said case. Parties will be referred to as plaintiffs and defendants as per their ranking in the trial Court.