BHUPAL AND ORS. Vs. UDAYAKUMAR RAYAPPA AKKI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 in O.S. No. 82/1996 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) Bailhongal have come up in this second appeal impugning the concurrent findings of both the Courts below in decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for the relief of declaration and permanent injunction in respect of GPC No. 998 said to be measuring 104 feet North -South and 15 feet East -West of Sampgaon village of Bailhongal Taluk, Belgaum District.

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

(3.) The case of the plaintiff is that, defendants without having any manner of right, title and interest in the suit property are trying to interfere with his possession. Hence, he filed suit for declaration and permanent injunction. In the said suit, defendant Nos. 1 to 3 entered appearance, filed written statement in the year 1997, wherein, they admit that suit schedule property as stated in the plaint is correct and that the said property was the property of the plaintiff. However, initially they took up the defence that they were put in possession of southern half portion of the suit property, where they have put up gobargas plant and toilet and also using the remaining portion for storing agricultural implements. However, in the year 1998, they have amended the written statement by taking up a divergent stand that they have been in possession of the suit property adverse to the title of the plaintiff openly and adversely to his knowledge, consequently they have perfected their title to the suit property. With this rival pleadings, suit went for trial and four issues were framed to consider the title of the plaintiff over the suit property and another issue with reference to the adverse possession, which was the alternate defence taken by the defendants by amending the original written statement.