SHAMBULINGAPPA Vs. MALLAJAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANTS are in second appeal challenging the judgment and decree passed by the VI Addl. District Judge, Mysore in RA 509/2009 on 13.7.2010.

(2.) THE plaintiffs, based on the right available to one Nanjamma who is said to be the propositus, by way of re -grant in her favour under the Personal & Miscellaneous Inams Abolition Act, claiming right sought for an injunction against the defendants in respect of the suit property. The suit came to be rejected by the trial court. Thereafter, plaintiffs filed appeal before the first appellate court producing additional document at Ex. P14 said to be an endorsement issued by the Spl. Deputy Commissioner based on which the lower appellate court opined that there is a re -grant order in favour of Nanjamma during 1958. Also noting some entries in the RTC that revenue was paid for the year 1935 -36 and also for the year 1945 -46; importance has not been attached to the said documents by the trial court and the endorsement issued by the Deputy Commissioner - Ex. P14 coupled with the" payment of revenue vide Exs. P2 -3, tried to conclude that plaintiffs were in possession of the suit schedule property as on the date of filing of the suit and also though the trial court had taken into consideration the RTC entries which was standing in the name of Channappa/2nd defendant, Ex. D3 to 11 and also the record of rights produced at Ex. D1, the same was scored of holding that there is a prima facie case in favour of the plaintiffs.

(3.) THE substantial question of law framed for consideration is -'whether the first appellate court is justified in holding that the plaintiffs are in possession of the suit schedule property by drawing inference from the documents Ex. P1 to P4'.