NAGARAJU Vs. M. MAHESHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant has come in appeal aggrieved by the judgment and decree, dated 2.11.2012 passed by the Court of the XXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore (CCH -23) in O.S. No. 650/2008. The facts of the case in brief are that the respondent -plaintiff claims that site No. 3535 at Chandranagar was allotted by BDA to his mother Mahadevamma. A lease -cum -sale agreement was executed in her favour on 8.3.1989. She died on 9.1.1993 and her husband Mahadeva died on 2.3.2004. The respondent -plaintiff thus claiming to be the solitary LFL of Mahadevamma represented to the BDA for the execution of absolute sale deed in his favour. The BDA executed the sale deed under the registered document on 27.10.2007 in his favour. It is the further case of the respondent -plaintiff that when he went to the suit schedule property in the second week of December 2007, he found that the appellant -defendant had occupied it. The respondent instituted the suit seeking the relief of declaration that he is the owner of the suit schedule property and for the relief of possession and permanent injunction. The appellant defendant filed the written statement denying the plaint averments and allegations. The appellant claimed that Mahadeva, the husband of Mahadevamma had entered into agreement of sale in favour of the appellant for an agreed sale consideration of Rs. 58,000/ -. It is the further case of the appellant that the said Mahadeva also executed the general power of attorney in favour of the appellant.

(2.) BASED on the rival -pleadings, the Trial Court formulated the following issues:

(3.) WHETHER defendant proves that he is the owner of the suit property?