S. SHYLESH KUMAR Vs. RADHAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these appeals have arisen out of a common judgment passed by the learned Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & CJM, Kolar, in R.A. Nos. 182/2000 and 184/2000 vide common judgment dated 21.02.2006. R.A. Nos. 182/2000 and 184/2000 had arisen out of original suits bearing O.S. Nos. 160/1995 and 130/1995 pending on the file of the Court of Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Malur.

(2.) O .S. No. 160/1995 filed by this appellant -Shylesh Kumar, as plaintiff against the respondents herein for the relief of specific performance of the contract came to be decreed by the trial Court after contest. Suit filed by the respondents herein as plaintiff in O.S. No. 130/1995 before the Court of Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Malur, for the relief of mandatory injunction came to be dismissed vide considered judgment. Against the said judgments and decrees, two separate appeals came to be filed under Section 96 of CPC before the Court of Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & CJM, at Kolar. Both the appeals have been allowed. The judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 160/1995 has been set aside and consequently suit is dismissed. Suit filed by the respondents herein as plaintiffs in O.S. No. 130/1995 has been decreed directing the appellants herein to vacate and handover the vacant possession of the suit schedule property. It is these divergent judgments which are called in question on various grounds as set out in the appeals filed under Section 100 before this Court.

(3.) SEVERAL grounds have been urged in the separate appeal memorandum filed under Section 100 CPC. During the pendency of the appeal in RSA No. 1328/2006, an application has been filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC dated 11.09.20014 to produce the photographs of the schedule property as additional evidence. The same is supported by an affidavit sworn to by the first appellant Shylesh Kumar.