MANCHANAIKA Vs. BOKKANAIKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal is filed against the concurrent finding of the Trial Court as well as the First Appellate Court.

(2.) This matter is listed for admission. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant.

(3.) The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiff before the Trial Court while seeking the relief of possession is that the grandmother of the plaintiff Smt. Devamma is the owner of the house bearing No.182/1, 182/2 and 182/3 totally measuring 24x66. This property is divided into Item Nos.1 and 2 and the Item No.1 portion of property is in possession of the plaintiff and portion of Item No.2 property is in the possession of the defendants. Defendant Nos.2 to 5 are the family members of defendant No.1. The grandmother of plaintiff is an old aged woman. On the ground of humanity, given some portion of the house i.e., Item No.2 property to the defendants for their residential purpose with subject to condition. These facts are known to everybody in the village and even today defendant No.1 and his family members i.e., defendant Nos.2 to 5 are in permissible possession of Item No.2 of the property. The Khatha of the suit Item Nos.1 and 2 stands in the name of the grandmother of the plaintiff. Apart from that KEB bills and other revenue records are standing in her name. The grandmother of plaintiff executed a registered gift deed in favour of the plaintiff on 27/1/2012 in respect of the suit schedule property. By virtue of the said registered gift deed, the plaintiff acquired the ownership and possession of the suit schedule property. The Item No.2 property is in dilapidation condition, therefore, the plaintiff made an enquiry with the defendants that to vacate Item No.2 property to demolish and reconstruct the same. Though defendants agreed to vacate, but did not vacate the same. The plaintiff also made an application to the competent authority i.e., Panchayath for change of katha in relation to entire suit schedule property by virtue of said gift deed. The same was objected by filing an objections and hence, an endorsement was issued and defendants also refused to vacate premises. Hence, filed the suit.