H. P. SANDESH
Thammaiah S/o. Venkataramanappa – Appellant
Versus
Late Puttaiah S/o. Seebaiah Since Deceased By His Lrs – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree of dismissal of suit in O.S.No.22/2012 dated 11.12.2014 and the judgment and decree of dismissal of appeal in R.A.No.2/2015 dated 16.12.2016 and pray this Court to set aside both the judgments and allow the appeal and consequently, pass the judgment and decree in favour of the appellant.
2. The factual matrix of the case of the appellant-plaintiff before the Trial Court while seeking the relief of declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction and later amended for possession is that the suit schedule property originally belongs to one Muttu, S/o. Honnegowda and the same has been purchased by the plaintiff by virtue of registered sale deed dated 18.12.1972 and he was put in possession of the property. The plaintiff is the absolute owner thereof and he has improved the suit schedule property by spending huge money and has raised coconut garden and paying taxes to the concerned authority. The defendants having no manner of right, title or possession over the suit schedule property made an attempt to interfere with his possession and made an attempt to dispossess him from the suit schedule property by deny
Gavi Sidde Gowda Vs. State of Karnataka and Another
Puttamma and Others Vs. The Deputy Commissioner, Shimoga District and Others
Chhedi Lal Yadav and Others Vs. Hari Kishore Yadav (Dead) Through Legal Representatives and Others
Joint Collector Ranga Reddy District and Another Vs. D. Narsing Rao and Others
Santoshkumar Shivgonda Patil and Others Vs. Balasaheb Tukaram Shevale and Others
Mutation or revenue entries are made only for fiscal purposes for deciding liability to pay land tax or land revenue.
Title suit – Revenue entries do not decide issue of title in respect of property – In comprehensive suit, title of party has to be adjudicated based on title documents and not on basis of revenue rec....
Mere entries in revenue records do not confer title; to maintain a suit for declaration, a party must also seek possession.
Ownership of immovable property must be established through valid title documents; revenue records alone do not confer ownership rights.
A plaintiff must establish their own ownership in a suit for title and possession, as entries in revenue records do not confer title.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of documentary evidence in establishing property ownership and the burden of proof in property disputes.
Possession follows title; entries in revenue records do not confer ownership. A suit for injunction is maintainable without seeking declaration of title when possession is established.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.