SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(Kar) 148

V.GOPALA GOWDA
SHEKARAPPA VEERAPPA HARAYABAL – Appellant
Versus
MAHAMMADSAB MALIKSAB NADAF – Respondent


Advocates:
P.A.PATIL, P.H.GOTKHINDI

V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant was the Plaintiff and respondent was the defendant in the trial Court for the sake of convenience, the parties are REFERRED TO as per their rank in the trial Court.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff filed the suit in O. S. No. 86/90 for declaration that he is using prescriptive right over the portion marked as EFIJ in the hand-sketch produced and for permanent injunction against the defendant. The defendant filed written statement resisting the suit and denying the case pleaded by the plaintiff. According to him, the hand-sketch is not correct and there is no road in the portion claimed by the plaintiff. On the basis of the pleadings, the trial Court framed issues. Both the parties led evidence by examining witnesses and producing documents. On appreciation of the material on record, the trial Court by its judgment dated 23-11-1996 decreed the suit directing the defendant to keep open 4 feet width way in the portion EFIJ to have free access to the plaintiff to reach the main road. Defendant was also restrained from causing any obstruction in the said portion. Against the said judgment, the defendant filed first appeal in R. A. No. 86/96. The first appellate















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top