The plaintiff's failure to provide sufficient evidence of ownership and possession of the disputed land led to the dismissal of the suit.

K.N. KESHAVANARAYANA, J.-This appeal by the Legal Representatives of the plaintiff in O.S. No. 7920/2004 on the file of the XVII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, is directed against the judgment and order dated 03.12.2011 passed therein dismissing the suit filed for the relief of declaration of title and permanent injunction.

2. The subject matter of the suit is the land bearing Survey No. 18/3 measuring 1 acre situated in Kadabeesanahalli Village, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk, Bangalore Urban District. Maliappa, s/o. Hullurappa was the original plaintiff. He died during the pendency of the suit and thereafter his wife and children, who are the appellants herein, came on record and continued the suit. The original plaintiff filed the suit seeking the following reliefs:-

(a) Declaration, declaring that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property;

(b) permanent injunction as consequential relief and thereby restrain the defendants, their agents, henchmen or anybody claiming any right under or through them, from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by the plaintiff, in any manner; and

(c) for costs and such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.

3. The plaintiff inter alia contended that he purchased the suit schedule property bearing Survey No. 18/3 from one Muniyannappa under the registered sale deed dated 11.11.1959; that on the date of the sale he was placed in possession of the land; that ever since then, he is in possession and enjoyment of the same; that at the time of executing sale deed on 11.11.1959, though description of the property had been clearly identified through boundary mentioned in the sale deed, however, while mentioning the survey number, it was wrongly mentioned as 18/4 instead of 18/3, but actual physical possession of the property given to the plaintiff was Sy. No. 18/3; that he continued in possession of Survey No. 18/3 and subsequently under the registered sale deed dated 02.11.1971 the plaintiff sold the suit schedule property to one Nanjappa and again under the registered sale deed dated 15.07.1978, he repurchased the property from Nanjappa; that thus, the plaintiff continued as owner in possession of the suit schedule property; that though the revenue authorities were expected to make changes in the revenue records pursuant to the sale deeds, it was not done properly and as there were some mistakes in identifying the survey numbers, the authorities wrongly recorded the name of the plaintiff in column Nos. 9 & 12(2) in respect of Survey No. 18/4 instead of 18/3. Therefore, an application was filed before the Tahsildar, Bangalore, South Taluk, for conducting survey of the land and to identify the property in actual physical possession of the plaintiff and thereafter to rectify the entries in the revenue records; that the said application was registered as RRT (DIS) No. 11/98-99 and survey was conducted on 20.08.1998, wherein the surveyor prepared a detailed sketch and on survey, it was found that the plaintiff has been in possession and enjoyment of the property bearing Survey No. 18/3; that accordingly, entries in the revenue records were changed; that subsequently, the Bangalore Development Authority acquired a portion of the land measuring 2 guntas out of the portion in occupation of the plaintiff for formation of Ring Road and in respect of the said acquisition, compensation was also paid to the plaintiff; that thus, the title of the plaintiff in respect of Survey No. 18/3 was recognized, as such, the plaintiff is the lawful owner in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property; that in that capacity, the plaintiff put-up constructions on a portion of the suit schedule property abutting ring road and leased them for commercial purposes to different tenants; that in the remaining portion, after