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

2022 Supreme(Kar) 1576

M. G. UMA
K. N. Basappa – Appellant
Versus
B. Nagendrappa – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Manjula R. Kamadolli, Advocate, Gururaj Joshi, Advocate

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. The appellants - plaintiffs have preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dtd. 7/2/2008 passed in OS No.153 of 1999 on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) and JMFC, Harapanahalli (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court' for brevity), dismissing the suit of the plaintiffs with costs, refusing to grant declaration of easementary rights to the cart track as perfected their right by prescription, which was confirmed vide judgment dtd. 5/10/2010 passed in RA No.59 of 2009 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Harapanahalli (hereinafter referred to as 'the First Appellate Court' for brevity), by dismissing the appeal.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to as per their status and rank before the Trial Court.

3. Brief facts of the case are that, the original plaintiff K N Basappa filed OS No.153 of 1999 against defendant Nos.1 to 3 for declaration that he perfected the right over the cart track shown in the suit sketch as A, B and C, over the land bearing Sy.Nos.339-A, B and C belonging to the defendants, for the purpose of reaching his land both by cart and tractor and to restrain the defendants and their men

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