The court upheld that possession is key in injunction cases, reaffirming the presumption in favor of older title documents when evidence of possession is compelling.

JUDGMENT :

H.P. SANDESH, J.

This second appeal is filed against the reversal of judgment passed by the First Appellate Court in R.A.No.38/2014 granting the relief of permanent injunction reversing the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court in O.S.No.289/2007.

2. The parties are referred to as per their original rankings before the Trial Court to avoid confusion and for the convenience of the Court.

3. The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiff while seeking the relief of permanent injunction in the plaint is that the suit schedule property is the land bearing Sy.No.13/1 measuring 1 acre 37 guntas out of 14 acres 38 guntas situated at Kallahalli Village, Urdigere Hobli, Tumakuru Taluk bounded on East-property of Prakashaiah, S/o. Siddabasavaiah, West-property of Hallappa, North-property of Chowdaiah, Palanethraiah and South-Road and Village limits. It is contended that the father of the plaintiff namely Gangasiddaiah has purchased the suit schedule property from the said Yelavaiah for valuable consideration under a registered sale deed dated 27.01.1970. All the revenue records were made out in the name of the father of the plaintiff and during his life time, he was in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property along with his family members. After his death, the plaintiff has succeeded the suit schedule property by inheritance and continued possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. He is cultivating the suit schedule property and raising crops and also paying revenue to the Government. But, after the death of his father, he has not taken any steps for change of revenue entries in his favour for long time and the revenue entries are still continued in the name of the father of the plaintiff and he has filed an petition for change of revenue entries and the same is pending consideration. It is contended that the defendant is no way concerned to the suit schedule property or to Yelavaiah or to the family of the plaintiff. The defendant made an attempt to put up structure in the suit schedule property and hence, suit is filed for the relief of permanent injunction.

4. In pursuance of the suit summons, the defendant appeared and filed the written statement. In the written statement, it is contended that the averments made in the plaintiff are false and his defence is that as per Nowkari Barabardar, originally the land in Sy.No.13/3 of Kallahalli Village, Urdigere Hobli, Tumakuru Taluk measuring 14 acres 33 guntas including 5 guntas of Karab land are Talavarike Inam Land. The Government has granted the said land to Huchcha @ Huchchaiah, Karesidda @ Ammattura, Badapalli, Marisidda and Chikkasidda. The land measuring 3 acres 27 guntas was granted in the name of Huchcha @ Huchchaiah and he was in possession of the same. The boundary to the said property is East-land of Ranukaradhya, West-land of Revaiah, S/o. Papaiah and Anthuraiah, North-field of Chowdappa and South-field of Doddaramaiah. After his death, his son Hallappa was in possession of the same. Hallappa had a wife by name Marikenchamma. Since Hallappa and Marikenchamma had no issues, they adopted the defendant as their adopted son. They have given the lands to an extent of 1.39¼ guntas to the defendant under Vyavastapatra dated 11.05.1977. The remaining land of 2.22¾ was in the possession of Hallappa. Out of the said extent of land, Hallappa executed an agreement of sale to Revannasiddaiah, S/o.Karesidda @ Ammattura on 04.06.1998 for an extent of 1.04¾ guntas. The remaining extent of 0.23 guntas was bequeathed to the defendant by executing the Will dated 21.06.1999. Hallappa died on 27.09.2004. Ther