Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
V.SRISHANANDA
Chanrashekhar B. S/o Late K. Basavaiah – Appellant
Versus
Sowbhagya W/o Eshwara – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
V. SRISHANANDA, J.
1. Heard Sri Y.K.Narayana Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Naveen Kumar for Sri A.Madhusudhana Rao, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. Unsuccessful plaintiff is appellant in this Second Appeal.
3. Facts of the case which are necessary for disposal of the present appeal are as under:
A suit for bare injunction came to be filed, contending that plaintiff is the owner in possession in respect of property bearing Door No.4098/1 New No. L-29 Siddhapaji Temple road, Gandhi Nagar Mysuru, measuring East to West 18 feet, North to South 30 feet, having purchased the same on 04.09.2015 from Smt.Tholasamma, Sri Srinivas and others through registered sale deed.
-
4. Plaintiff after purchase of the property applied for change of revenue entries and after the transfer of revenue entries in the name of the plaintiff, he is paying taxes in respect of the suit property.
5. Mysuru City Corporation having objected the change of Katha in the name of the plaintiff, had to ultimately transfer the revenue entries pursuant to the order passed by this court in W.P No. 50102/2015.
6. It is the further case of the plaintiff that defendants are politically influence
A plaintiff must prove lawful possession to obtain an injunction, mere ownership claims insufficient without evidence of actual possession.
Judgments in appeal can only be overturned when proved unjust; proper possession and legal title must be substantiated through evidence.
The court affirmed that a plaintiff with established possession is entitled to a permanent injunction against interference, supported by valid ownership documentation.
Ownership claims must rely on substantive evidence, as documentary title prevails over mere revenue entries in property disputes.
Suit filed for perpetual injunction by plaintiff, when there is cloud over title is not maintainable.
A plaintiff must demonstrate lawful possession and accurate property boundaries to succeed in a suit for permanent injunction, particularly when challenged by a defendant claiming prior possession.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a suit for permanent injunction may not be legally sustainable without seeking the relief of declaration of title, especially when the plainti....
In property disputes, proof of ownership and lawful possession must be established; mere claims without supporting evidence lead to dismissal of injunction requests.
In a property injunction suit, a plaintiff must demonstrate current possession, irrespective of competing title claims, to obtain relief.
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
