SHARDI BAI Vs. R T DASYA NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a defendants appeal against the judgment and decree of the Trial Court which has decreed the suit of the plaintiff for declaration and injunction.

(2.) FOR the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the original suit.

(3.) THE case of the plaintiff is, one Sri.Kamalya Naik was the Propositus. He had two sons by name Sri.Krishna Naik and Sri.Rama Naik. The father of the plaintiffs late Rama Naik during his lifetime purchased the properties in Sy.No.60 measuring 05 acres 01 gunta and Sy.No.61 measuring 05 acres situate at Ghantapura Village, Honnali Taluk, Davanagere District as per Order No.AD 54/1940 -41 dated 13.03.1941. The properties, which he purchased are more particularly described in the schedule to the plaint and hereinafter referred to as the schedule property . The father of the plaintiff was in actual possession and enjoyment of the suit properties as the absolute owner and mutation entries were effected in his name. The defendants are having no manner of right, title or interest muchless possession over the suit schedule properties. The plaintiffs are regularly remitting the land revenue in respect of the said land. Since the plaintiffs and their ancestors are illiterates and innocent villagers, it appears, they have not taken proper attention to have their names properly entered in the Revenue Records. Taking advantage of such ignorance, the revenue officials in collusion with the defendants mischievously manipulated the revenue entries in the name of the first defendant. The first defendant even though is the daughter -in -law of Krishna Naik, the father of the second defendant, by mis -representing herself as the daughter -in -law of Rama Naik @ Totya Naik, the father of the plaintiffs got inserted her name in the revenue records in relation to the suit schedule properties as per illegal entries vide RRC No.110/1969 -70. No notices were issued to the plaintiffs while effecting the revenue entries in the name of the first defendant and no enquiry was conducted as contemplated under the provisions of Karnataka Land Revenue Act. The entries were carried out surruptiously in her name behind the back of the plaintiffs On the date, these entries were made, the grandfather of the first defendant was alive not to mention defendant No.2 who was also alive. Even the husband of the first defendant was alive on the date, the entries were made. The said manipulated entries were continued till the year 2001. On coming to know of the said entries, the plaintiffs immediately approached the Tahsildar, Honnali Taluk, Honalli and submitted representation for rectification of revenue records and to effect their names in the revenue records in relation to suit schedule properties. The Tahsildar dismissed their application. Therefore, they preferred an appeal in R.A.No.92/201 - 02 before the Assistant Commissioner, Sub -Division, Davanagere. The Assistant Commissioner also dismissed the said appeal by his order dated 22.05.2002. Against the said order, they preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Davanagere District which also came to be dismissed. The defendants are very influential and rich persons having more than 40 acres of agricultural lands besides one of the sons of the second defendant is a top class Government official, and as such they have been bent upon dis -possessing the plaintiff to make wrongful gain taking undue advantage of erroneous and cryptic orders passed by the revenue authorities. Since the revenue authorities held the case against the plaintiffs, they are constrained to file the suit as contemplated under Section 135 of the Karnataka land Revenue Act. Therefore, they sought for a declaration that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners in actual possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property and defendants have no manner of rights, title and interest muchless possession over the same. They also sought for decree of permanent injunction.