NAGAMMA Vs. DEVEERAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is defendants' second appeal from the judgment and decree dated 23-10-1990 passed by Sri r. h. raddi, principal civil judge and c. j. m. , shimoga in regular appeal No. 41/88 dismissing the defendants' appeal and confirming the judgment and decree dated 20-2-1988 given by sri. C. g. hungund, principal munsiff, shimoga, in original suit No. 589/1977, decreeing the plaintiffs-respondents' suit for declaratory decree declaring the plaintiffs-respondents to be the absolute owner of the suit schedule properties as well as for permanent injunction directing defendants (appellants) not to interfere with the plaintiffs' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property.

(2.) THE facts of the case in brief are that, the present plaintiffs-respondents filed the suit for declaration that plaintiffs alone have got right title and interest in the suit properties and are in possession of the same. Plaintiffs have also prayed for grant of decree for permanent injunction. The suit properties are more specifically described in the schedule attached to the plaint.

(3.) THE original owner of the suit properties was one karadi erappa. Karadi erappa had two daughters known by names halamma and eramma. It is as per the material on record which is not in dispute between the parties, that the original owner erappa died in the year 1920. It is also not in dispute that karadi erappa at the time of his death had no son but had only two daughters, as his wife had predeceased him. So at the time of death of karadi erappa, there were only two daughters who on the death of karadi erappa, inherited the properties left by karadi erappa in the year 1920. It is also not in dispute that eramma was married to karadi basappa and halamma was married to karadi basappa and halamma was married to karadi mallappa. Eramma died issueless. The case of the plaintiffs has been that after the death of eramma, halamma continued to be in actual possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties who in the year 1951 executed a registered gift deed in favour of the 1st plaintiff. She had also executed a registered will on 6-10-1977 in favour of the 1st plaintiff. Plaintiffs' case has been that defendants had no title, right in the properties, but inspite of that they started claiming the rights in suit property. Plaintiffs' case has been that plaintiffs have filed a suit against karadi basappa, husband of eramma, who tried to meddle with the plaintiffs' possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties in o. s. No. 37/1951-52 which ended in a compromise and under compromise, karadi basappa was allowed to cultivate the land till his life-time. Plaintiffs alleged that the 1st defendant has claimed to be the kept mistress of said karadi basappa. Defendants 2 and 3 have no relationship of whatsoever with the family of karadi basappa. In such circumstances, plaintiffs claimed the reliefs in the suit as has been mentioned above. The cause of action has been alleged to be the act of criminal trespass committed by the defendants on 27-10-1977 and cutting of 576 loads of crop.