GANGAMMA Vs. B G THIMMAPPAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the defendant before the trial court. The parties are referred to by their rank before the trial court, for the sake of convenience.

(2.) THE suit was filed seeking a declaration that the plaintiff was the owner of the property described in the Schedule to the suit, for possession of the same and mesne profits. The property was described as bearing CTS no.58, in a portion of land bearing survey no. 38 of Yeshwanthpur village, Bangalore. The property was measuring approximately 45 feet by 35 feet.

(3.) IN support of the grounds raised in the appeal, the learned counsel for the appellant defendant contends that the plaintiff claiming that the defendant was a tenant in respect of the suit property had significantly failed to indicate the date on which the defendant had been inducted in to the property. This was a primary ingredient which has been glossed over by the trial court. It is contended that the following circumstances would further demonstrate that the suit ought to have been dismissed as being hopelessly barred by limitation.