Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD BENCH
C.M.POONACHA
Maruti, S/o. Shiddappa Kalal – Appellant
Versus
Manjunath, S/o. Mailarappa Mali – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
C.M. POONACHA, J.
The present second appeal is filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, [Hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’] by the plaintiff challenging the judgment and decree dated 24.08.2009 passed in R.A.No.61/2008 by District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Haveri, [Hereinafter referred to as the ‘first appellate Court’] and the judgment and decree dated 19.4.2008 passed in OS No.12/2004 by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) and JMFC, Hangal, [Hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’], wherein the suit for declaration and injunction has been dismissed by the Trial Court which has been affirmed by the first appellate Court.
2. The parties will be referred to as per their ranking before the Trial Court for the sake of convenience.
3. It is the case of the plaintiff that property bearing Sy.No.314/B, plot No.20 measuring 11 guntas (TMC No.4487),[Hereinafter referred to as the ‘suit property’] originally belonged to one Hanamanthappa Rajappa Chikkannavar and it was part of property bearing Sy.No.314/1 which totally measured 7 acres 29 guntas. That out of the said property, an extent of 4 acres was converted to non agricultural purpose on 27.3.1981 and
The court held that a sale deed remains valid despite non-payment of consideration, affirming ownership rests with the purchaser as per registered transaction under the Transfer of Property Act.
The distinction between judgment in rem and judgment in personam, and the binding nature of judgment in rem on anyone claiming interest in the property.
Mere entries in revenue records do not confer title; to maintain a suit for declaration, a party must also seek possession.
A declaration of property ownership requires establishing possession; without it, claims regarding related deeds are insufficient.
A co-owner can validly sell their share in joint properties, and the sale deed cannot be declared void if it is within the extent of the seller's interest.
A suit for declaration is not maintainable without claiming possession, impacting the ownership rights in property disputes.
The sale deed for the property did not require permission from the Collector, and the suit was maintainable without a declaration of title.
A sale deed executed under coercion, influenced by government circulars limiting sales, is void, affirming the right to property under Article 300A.
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
