The ownership of property is established through valid documentation and recognition in property records despite claims of prior ownership.

JUDGMENT :

SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR, J.

1. This second appeal came to be admitted to consider the following substantial question of law:

“Whether the trial Court and the first appellate Court are justified in declaring defendant No.1 as the owner of Survey No.15/a, measuring 7 acres, despite the admission in the written statement that the property jointly belonged to Hanumantappa and Erappa?”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent No.1.

3. The appellant has filed a suit in O.S.No.112/2006 against the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and one Basamma W/o. late Hanumanthappa. The said suit is filed seeking declaration with respect to the property bearing Survey No.15/a, measuring 7 acres, situated at Gonniganur village, taluk Sindhanur on the basis of the sale deed dated 31.12.2001 (Ex.P.2). The said sale deed (Ex.P.2) has stated to be executed by Kunta Earappa and Ayyappa sons of late Siddayya, Earamma W/o. late Siddayya and defendant No.2- Basamma and defendant No.3 Ambanna. It is the case of the appellant/plaintiff before the trial Court that, Hanumanthappa and Earappa have jointly purchased Survey No.15, measuring 13 acres, 31 guntas in the name of Hanumanthappa and his name continued in the property records. It is the case of the appellant/plaintiff that, even though the said property is purchased in the name of Hanumanthappa, it is allotted to the share of Earappa and Earappa’s legal heirs have executed a sale deed (Ex.P.2) in favour of the appellant/plaintiff. The appellant/plaintiff claimed that, his name was entered in the cultivators column since the year 1968 and he was a prospective purchaser.

4. The respondent No.1/defendant No.1 has filed written statement along with counter claim seeking declaration that he is the owner of Survey No.15/a, measuring 7 acres, having purchased the same under a sale deed dated 06.12.2021 (Ex.D.1) from defendant No.2- Basamma and respondent No.2/defendant No.3 Ambanna. Defendant No.1 has admitted that, Survey No.15, measuring 13 acres 31 guntas has been jointly purchased by Hanumanthappa and Earappa and a sale deed has been executed only in favour of Hanumanthappa. Defendant No.1 has denied that, the entire Survey No.15, measuring 13 acres 31 guntas has been allotted to the share of Earappa and the name of the plaintiff has been entered in the cultivators column as a prospective purchaser. One Earappa @ Kunta Earappa S/o. Siddayya is also a witness to the sale deed - Ex.D.1. The name of defendant No.2 Basamma has been entered in the record of rights of the suit property measuring Survey No.15, measuring 13 acres 31 guntas, after the death of Hanumanthappa in the year 1983 under mutation No.23 (Ex.P.3). Out of 13 acres 31 guntas, 6 acres 31 guntas has been allotted to the share of Ambanna grand son of Earappa and 7 acres has been retained by Basamma as her share. It is contended by respondent No.1/defendant No.1 that as on the date of purchase, the name of defendant No.2-Basamma was entered in record of rights of the suit property bearing Survey No.15, measuring 7 acres, has purchased the same from defendant No.2-Basamma and her son Ambanna who is respondent No.2/defendant No.3. Defendant No.1 has contended that, plaintiff’s vendors have no right for alienating the suit property. Defendant No.1 has also made a counter claim seeking declaration of title by virtue of a sale deed dated 06.12.2021 (Ex.D.1).

5. The trial Court on appreciation of the evidence on record has dismissed the suit of the plaintiff and decreed the counter claim filed by respondent No.1/defendant No.1. The appellant/plaintiff challenged the said decree passed by the t