Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
RAVI V.HOSMANI
Meenakshi K., W/o Late Ananda Rao – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Executive Engineer, Panchayatraj – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAVI V HOSMANI, J.
Challenging judgment and decree dated 17.03.2023 passed by Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Bantwal, D.K., in R.A.no.9/2021 and judgment and decree dated 09.06.2021 by Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Bantwal, Dakshina Kannada, in O.S.no.109/2012, this second appeal is filed.
2. Sri Divakara K.N., Akshay S., learned counsel for appellants no.1 and 3 to 5 submitted that appeal was by plaintiffs in O.S.no.109/2012 filed for relief of permanent injunction restraining respondents/defendants from widening existing 3 metre roadway in plaint 'A' schedule properties bearing Sy.no.200/4A, measuring 0.56 cents and in Sy.no.200/5, measuring 0.28 cents, situated at Kedila village, Bantwal Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District (hereinafter referred to as 'Suit Properties') or from interfering with peaceful possession of same, except to extent of making use of 3 metre roadway and directing defendants to restore it to its original condition etc.
3. In plaint, it was stated that one K. Ananda Rao was absolute owner of Suit Properties and on death of K. Ananda Rao, plaintiffs succeeded to same and that there existed 3 metre width road in it running from Karimajal to Patrak
In permanent injunction suits, issues of title must be explicitly framed and addressed to ensure procedural fairness, enabling parties to substantiate their claims.
A claimant must establish exclusive settled possession and document rights to land for relief against interference; admissions impacting access rights must be substantiated.
(1) Suit for mere injunction does not lie only when defendant raises genuine dispute with regard to title and when he raises cloud over title of plaintiff.(2) Issue with regard to title can be decide....
The court affirmed that adverse inferences can be drawn from a party's failure to produce pivotal witness testimony and pertinent evidence, impacting the burden of proof in established property right....
The appellate court exceeded its jurisdiction by modifying injunction terms without a title claim being made in the original suit.
(1) If matter involved is simple and straightforward, court may decide upon issue regarding title, even in a suit for injunction. If matter involves complicated questions of fact and law relating to ....
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
