Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
C.M. POONACHA
Sriramulu S/o Surya Prakash – Appellant
Versus
U. Ravi Rao S/o Late Narayana Rao – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of property ownership and tenant claims. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments of the appellant and respondent regarding possession. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. initial consideration of submissions and relevant legal questions. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. factual findings of the trial court regarding possession. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. legal principles regarding caretaker rights and possession. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. discussion of previous cases and distinctions made. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. conclusion on plaintiff's lack of interest in property. (Para 23) |
| 8. final decision dismissing the appeal. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
JUDGMENT :
C.M. POONACHA, J.
1. The present appeal is filed under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Hereinafter referred to as the ‘CPC’] by the plaintiff being aggrieved by the order dated 09.04.2025 passed in O.S. No.2473/2024 by the IX Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-5), [Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Trial Court’] whereunder I.A. Nos. I and II filed by the plaintiff were dismissed by the Trial Court.
2. The relevant facts in a nutshell leading to the present appeal are that one Sri U.Narayana Rao with his wife Smt.U
A caretaker cannot acquire rights to property solely through long possession; valid rental or license agreements are necessary for legal protection.
Settled possession cannot be deemed unlawful solely due to resignation; eviction requires due process of law.
Question of title can be looked into in a suit for injunction unless same is very complicated – A person who is in settled possession cannot be dispossessed except in accordance with law.
The law in India accords with the jurisprudential thought as propounded by Salmond, respecting possession even if there is no title to support it. Possession can only be resumed by the true owner in ....
A person in peaceful and settled possession is entitled to protection against dispossession without due process, even from the rightful owner.
A person in settled possession is entitled to protect their possession against even the true owner, regardless of title.
Permanent injunction – A person cannot have benefit of protection order from Court when he has failed to prima facie establish his right to remain in possession of property.
A person in settled possession is protected against forcible dispossession by the true owner without legal recourse, even if the title is disputed.
A trespasser cannot claim ownership based on unlawful possession; clear legal grounds for ownership must be established.
A family member of a tenant cannot claim legal rights to property or file for an injunction without asserting ownership or interest, demonstrating a lack of enforceable obligation under the law.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
