GANAPAMMA Vs. KAMALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE widow and children of original plaintiff, Venkatagowda, have come up in this second appeal impugning the concurrent finding of both the Courts below in rejecting their prayer for the relief of declaration of title and permanent injunction with reference to land bearing Sy. No. 72 measuring to an extent of 2 acres 31 guntas and Sy. No. 71 measuring to an extent of 3 acres 8 guntas which are suit schedule item Nos. 1 and 2 situated in Mavinasara Village, Anandapuram Hobli, Sagar Taluk. The case of the original plaintiff and also his widow and children, who are appellants herein, is that the aforesaid lands bearing Sy. Nos. 71 and 72 were granted in favour of original plaintiff Venkatagowda in the year 1956, since then he was in possession and enjoyment of the same. The original plaintiff filed a suit in O.S. No. 292/1989 on the file of Munsiff, Sagar, for the relief of permanent injunction against first defendant in the suit, namely Jattamma. It is seen that subsequently said Venkatagowda has withdrawn the suit filed by him for the relief of permanent injunction in O.S. No. 292/1989 and thereafter filed a comprehensive suit in O.S. No. 13/1993 for the relief of declaration of his title to the lands bearing Sy. Nos. 71 and 72 of Mavinasara Village and also for the relief of permanent injunction as against the defendant Nos. 1 to 3, who according to him are total strangers.

(2.) IN the said suit, defendant Nos. 1 to 3 entered appearance, filed their written statement, according to which first defendant is widow of one Chowdagowda @ Gundagowda and defendant Nos. 2 and 3 are the children of first defendant and her husband, Chowdagowda @ Gundagowda. It is their specific case that the plaintiffs father, Giddegowda had in all three sons, first son is Chowdagowda, father of defendant Nos. 2 and 3 and husband of first defendant. Second son is Huchhegowda and third son Venkatagowda, original plaintiff in O.S. No. 13/1993. According to them, first son of Giddegowda, namely Chowdagowda died 25 years prior to filing of the suit for the relief of permanent injunction and that second son of Giddegowda, namely Huchhegowda has no issues and so far as third son, Venkatagowda is concerned, he was managing the affairs of the family of Giddegowda. It is also their case that the land bearing Sy. Nos. 71 and 72 was under the cultivation of the family of Giddegowda. Subsequently at the time of filing an application seeking grant of the land under their cultivation, the father of original plaintiff died and so also his first son, who is husband of first defendant and therefore the third son, Venkatagowda, who was managing the affairs of the family, filed an application seeking grant of the said land in his favour. Though in the written statement, there is a specific plea to the effect that in the grant application, the particulars of all the family members are furnished, which included the name of first defendant's husband, plaintiff in the suit has not secured and produced the same to substantiate that the defence raised in the original suit by defendant Nos. 1 to 3 is incorrect and also to substantiate that the defendants are not the widow and children of Chowdagowda as contended by them and he has also failed to produce genealogy tree to show that Giddegowda had only two sons, namely Venkatagowda and Huchhegowda and not three sons as contended by the defendants.

(3.) WHETHER plaintiff proves his lawful possession and enjoyment over 1A. 15G. in Sy. No. 72 more -fully described in para -3 of W.S. as on the date of suit?