ANJIL VELLACHI Vs. MAMUNI BHASKARAN ALIAS VATTAYIL BHASKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Supplemental plaintiffs 2 to 8 in OS No. 79 of 1994 on the file of the Sub Court, Hosdurg are the appellants in this appeal. The said suit was one for fixation of the western boundary of the plaint schedule property which corresponds to the eastern boundary of the defendant's property.

(2.) The suit was originally filed before the Munsiffs Court, Hosdurg as OS No. 357 of 1992. While so, that Court had issued a Commission and the Advocate Commissioner deputed by the Court submitted Ext. A7 report and Ext. A8 plan. Subsequently, after the valuation in the suit was enhanced, the plaint was returned for presentation before the Sub Court, Hosdurg which disposed of the suit as per the impugned decree and judgment. Both sides as well as the Court below relied on Exts. A8 report and A9 plan for the purpose of identification of the respective properties.

(3.) While, according to the plaintiff, the western boundary line of the suit property is along the line NM in Ext. A8 plan, according to the defendant, the western boundary line is along the line JKL in Ext. A8 plan. The Court below, after trial, as per judgment and decree dated 04/07/1997, came to the conclusion that in the light of the row of trees and ridge demarcating the property in the possession of the plaintiffs and the western property of the defendant, the plaintiffs were in possession of only plot ABCDEFGHIJKL in Ext. A8 plan. The Trial Court noted that in order to satisfy the extent of 54 cents covered by their title deeds the plaintiffs? property would go up to the line MN. The Court below also found that the 65 cents of land covered by the title deeds of the defendant would include the disputed yellow shaded plot MNKL also. The suit was accordingly dismissed. Hence this appeal by the legal representatives of the original plaintiff.