SHARANAPPA Vs. G. NAGAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant in O.S. No. 110/1998 on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Kudligi has come up in this second appeal impugning the divergent finding rendered by the lower appellate Court in R.A. No. 27/2006 While allowing the said appeal by judgment and decree dated 13.04.2010, the lower appellate Court has set aside the judgment and decree dated 26.07.2006 in dismissing the suit of the respondent herein in O.S. No. 110/1998 on the file of Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Kudligi.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to this second appeal are as under:

(3.) PER contra, defendant adduced evidence by himself as D.W. 1 and also another witness by name Mazeed as D.W. 2 and relied upon two revenue documents and one partition deed. The sum and substance of his evidence is that, suit property is not the property bearing No. 64/B, but it is the property bearing No. 63/A, which according to him, belongs to one Aroodi Siddanna, who is none other than plaintiff's mother's elder sister's husband and to whom the said property is belonging. Though said evidence was adduced by him, he did not lead evidence through the said Aroodi siddanna, who is said to be the owner of plot bearing No. 63/A. It is further seen that, in that evidence there is a clear admission on the part of the defendant that he was never in possession of the suit property at any point of time and he also admits that he never owned any property adjacent to the suit property. In sum and substance, his only grievance is that the property which is claimed by the plaintiff as plot No. 64/B is the plot No. 63/A belonging to his maternal uncle Aroodi Siddanna.