M V GANGADHARAIAH Vs. RANGAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These second appeals are filed by the sole defendant in OS.Nos.64 and 65 of 2008 on the file of Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Gubbi, where said suits filed against him are decreed by separate judgment and decree dated 22.8.2014 and as against which he had filed two appeals before the lower appellate court in RA.Nos.44 and 43 of 2014 respectively, on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Gubbi, which are also dismissed by separate judgment and decrees dated 19.10.2017 and 1.3.2018 respectively. As against the concurrent findings of both the courts below, these two second appeals are filed by the sole defendant in aforesaid two suits.

(2.) Brief facts leading to these two second appeals are as under;

(3.) When the pleadings in both the suits are looked into, they are similar, wherein the plaintiff/s in both the suits would contend that the suit schedule sites are formed in a land which was acquired by the Assistant Commissioner, Tumakuru, for the purpose of forming a layout and to grant sites to houseless persons as ordered in proceedings bearing No.LB 474-78F2-54, 141, dated 14.5.1955 and vide memo bearing No.PL.437/53-54, dated 28.6.1955. According to them, the Gram Panchayat of Peddanahalli formed about 90 sites by preparing a sketch on 4.9.1974 and at the request of the plaintiff in both suits, the suit sites were allotted to them for construction of house on said sites. It is based on such allotment, they would submit that katha of suit schedule sites was mutated in their name, they are in possession and enjoyment of the same by paying tax to said sites. It is also contended that they are the absolute owners and nobody else has any title to said sites. It is further contended by the plaintiff/s that they have borrowed loan for construction of house on the suit schedule sites thereafter, obtained licence from Gram Panchayat for construction of dwelling house thereon and when the construction was commenced, it is stated that the defendant tried to interfere with their possession and construction activity. Hence, the suits were filed.