S. J. DHANANJAYA Vs. BHARAT ELECTRONICS EMPLOYEES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions are filed by the defendant against the orders dated 10.3.2017 and 24.4.2017 on I.A. Nos.11 and 12 made in O.S. No.1548/2008 on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural district, Bangalore dismissing I.A. Nos.11 and 12 filed under Order 26 Rule 9 of code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and under Order 14 Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure respectively.

(2.) The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration that he is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property and for consequential relief of possession directing the defendant to put him in immediate possession of the suit schedule property and also grant mesne profits contending that he the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the property bearing NO.1387 situated at Dwarakawasa Road, 7th Main, BEL layout, Bangalore, morefully described in the schedule to the plaint; the State Government has acquired about 108 acres 28 guntas of land in various survey numbers by issuing preliminary and final notifications for formation of BEL lay-out in Magadi Main Road, Bangalore; Subsequently the land was handed over to the plaintiff- society for formation of layout with sites and for development of the same on 19.2.1997; that after taking possession, the plaintiff had developed the layout, formed sites and allotted various sites to its members and retained some of the sites in the said layout and the suit schedule property is one such site owned and possessed by the plaintiff. It is further case of the plaintiff that the defendant who has no manner of right, title and interest over the suit schedule property has been trying to put up unauthorized construction over the schedule property. Therefore the plaintiff filed the suit for the relief sought for.

(3.) The defendant filed the written statement denying the entire plaint averments and contended that the plaintiff is not the owner of the suit schedule property and the plaintiff has no title over the same. It is also contended that in the guise of the suit, plaintiff is encroaching the defendant's property and therefore sought for dismissal of the suit.