R. N. NADIGAR S/O LATE M P RANGAPPA vs B. N. PADMANABHAIAH & SONS REP. BY ITS PARTNER, B. P. NARAYANA MURTHY SINCE DECEASED NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER B. N. LAKSHMISHA M G ROAD, TUMKUR

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Kar) 426

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
N.K. SUDHINDRARAO, J.
R. N. NADIGAR S/O LATE M P RANGAPPA - Appellant
Vs.
M/s. B. N. PADMANABHAIAH & SONS REP. BY ITS PARTNER, B. P. NARAYANA MURTHY SINCE DECEASED NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER B.N.LAKSHMISHA M G ROAD, TUMKUR - Respondent
R.S.A.No.2823/2010
Decided On : 01-10-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For The Appellant :SRI.B.N.ANANTHA NARAYANA, ADVOCATE.
For The Respondent:SRI.S.N.PRASHANTH CHANDRA, SMT.T.H.SAVITHA, HCGP, HARNAHALLI LAW PARTNERS, SRI.N.A.MADHUSUDHANA, ADVOCATE FOR PAVAMANA ASSOCIATES

Headnote:
Constitution of India,1950 - Suit schedule property - Suit of plaintiff - Claiming aggrieved - Contention in suit- plaintiffs claim to have approached the concerned authorities to get their grievance redressed to safeguard the public interest, but they failed and hence they filed the suit - Survey totally measured acres guntas of land out of which was acquired by Indian Railways acres remained in and remained in - Government took over acre guntas and from per - In respect of said lands revenue was not paid to the Government and they were resumed by the Government for non-payment of land revenue and thereafter they were reflected as Government land - Objections were called for from the public giving two years time and no objections were received –
Finding of the court : At end of day to get property of Government in tact for benefit of public and using it for noble purpose of running educational institution Suit is filed on - In morefully stated above and in background of litigation more over it was for declaration and plaintiffs were parties and scope of suit is already stated above - Insofar as concept of adverse possession is concerned defendants blow hot and cold at same time because at one stretch they claim to be owners of property as no forfeiture proceedings taken place and at other stretch they claim that they are in possession - When acts of possession could be seen to naked eyes by any passerby school was constructed in year and school is running and acts of possession can be seen and heard loud and clear even in voice of children who studied there –
Result : Appeal Allowed

JUDGMENT :

Appeal is directed against the Judgment and decree passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-II, Tumkur on 31.08.2010 in R.A.No.478/2009 (old R.A.No.67/2007), wherein the appeal preferred under Section 96 of CPC came to be allowed and Judgment and decree passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Tumkur in O.S.No.505/1989 dated 28.02.2007 was set aside and suit of the plaintiff was dismissed.

2. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the learned Appellate Judge, the plaintiff No.3 has preferred this second appeal.

3. In order to avoid repetition and overlapping, the parties are addressed in accordance with their ranks and status as stood before the trial Court.

4. The original suit was filed in O.S.No.505/1989 by the following persons, namely, (1) H.R.Gundurao, (2) T.L.Thimmappa, (3) R.N.Nadigar, (4) G.Sivasangarya, (5) T.B.Hanumanthaiah, (6) Narayanappa, (7) Narayanamurthy, (8) T.B.Ramakrishna, (9) Balaraju, (10) Nayeemkhan, (11) T.R.Yadugiri, (12) Muneer Ahamed, (13) Dr.T.D.Devarayulu, (14) M.S.Narasimhan, (15) T.R.Puttaswamy, (16) Shantaraman, (17) Prakash, (18) T.G.Nagaraju, (19) Yekanthasetty, (20) Imthiaj Ahamed, (21) G.P.N.Kumar, (22) Ramanna, (23)Hanumantha Rao, (24) R.Mukundaraju, (25) Jancheluvaraju, (26) Mohanbabu, (27) Sureshbabu, (28) T.A.Srishila, (29) N.Mallappa, (30) M.C.Rudrappa, (31) M.S.Venkoba Rao, (32) K.Ramachandranaik, (33)A.V.Shambu, (34) H.Chennamallaiah, (35) T.S.Devendrakumar, (36) G.H.Paramasivaiah, (37) K.M.Rangappa against defendants viz., (1) B.N.Padmanabhaiah and sons, (2) City Municipal Council, (3) Government of Karnataka, by its Chief Secretary, (4) B.S.Niranjan, (5) D.Aruladas, (6) B.R.Ramananda (7) Satyaprasad, (8) G.P.Parswanath, (9) A.B.Veerabhadraiah, (10) Kapanipathy, (11) P.C.Shivanna, (12) Ravikumar, (13) S.B.Shetty, (14) John, (15) D.M.Chittaranjan, (16) P.Lakshmana, (17) T.N.Sudarshan, (18) Abdul Hameed, (19) G.S.Chandrashekar and (20) P.Subramanyaswamy.

5. The suit was filed in representative capacity under Order I Rule 8 of CPC. After initial formalities, the suit was registered and allotted No.505/1989 on the file of Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Tumkur. The substance of the case of the plaintiffs is that they claim that they are filing this suit in public interest and not for their personal gain.

6. The suit schedule property as stated is land bearing Sy.No.81/1 measuring 6 acres 30 guntas. The subject matter of the present suit is 15 guntas of land measuring East to West 135 feet and North to South 118 feet with structures. The plaintiffs 1 to 4 are the students of Government Higher Secondary School and known as Government Junior College, Tumkur, at the time of filing of the suit.

7. The plaintiffs claim to have approached the concerned authorities to get their grievance redressed to safeguard the public interest, but they failed and hence they filed the suit.

8. Survey No.81 of Tumkur Kasaba, totally measured 7 acres 15 guntas of land, out of which 15 guntas was acquired by the Indian Railways, 5 acres 3 guntas remained in the khatha of Syed Mohamed Bokhari and 1 acre 37 guntas remained in the khatha of Lenkey. The Government took over 2 acres 22 guntas from the khatha of Syed Mohamed Bokhari and 1 acre 10 guntas from the khatha of Lenkey as per G.O.No.916-18/M/31-32/34 dated 10.09.1919. In respect of the said lands, revenue/kandayam was not paid to the Government and they were resumed by the Government for non-payment of land revenue and thereafter they were reflected as Government land. Objections were called for from the public giving two years time and no objections were received. Hence, in the year 1933-34 record of rights and index of lands were prepared. Sy.No.81 was phoded into two numbers as 81/1 -6 acres 30 guntas and 81/2 -10 guntas. This 6 acres 30 guntas of land is shown as Town Extension, means land belonging to Government High School compound, etc. Sy.No.81/2 is shown as land belonging to Makam Ramaswamy Setty.

9. Out of Sy.No.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document