The Court affirmed that the Kazi position does not confer hereditary property rights, emphasizing shared ancestral ownership over property despite claims for exclusive rights.

JUDGMENT :

M G UMA, J.

The plaintiffs in O.S.No.03.2006 (Old No.277/1991) on the file of the learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Kollegal, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court', for short), are impugning the judgment and decree dated 31.10.2007 dismissing the suit of the plaintiffs, which was confirmed vide judgment dated 01.07.2009 passed in RA.No.71/2007 on the file of the learned District Judge, Chamarajnagar (hereinafter referred to as 'the First Appellate Court', for short).

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as per their rank and status before the Trial Court.

3. Facts of the case in brief are that, plaintiff Nos.1 to 4 have filed the suit OS.No.277/1991 which was later renumbered as OS.No.03/2006 before the Trial Court, against the defendant seeking declaration that they are the absolute owners in possession of the properties and for grant of permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with their possession and enjoyment. The schedule attached to the plaint describes 5 agricultural properties bearing Sy.No.633/A measuring 52 cents, Sy.No.633/D measuring 45.35 acres, Sy.No.352 measuring 75 cents, Sy.No.353/B(1) measuring 28 cents and Sy.No.350 measuring 1.15 acres, which are situated at Bandahalli village, Kollegal Taluk, Mysore District with the boundaries mentioned therein (hereinafter referred to as 'the schedule properties').

4. It is stated by the plaintiffs that, one B.K.Mohammed Khalandar, the father of the defendant was the younger brother of B.K.Mohammed Jaffar, who is the father of the plaintiffs. Mohammed Jaffer was appointed as Kazi for the village of Bandahalli of Kollegal Taluk on 11.10.1942. Then Bandahalli of Kollegal taluk was the part of State of Tamilnadu. The appointment of the father of the plaintiffs as Kazi, was notified in the Gazzette on 29.09.1942. Accordingly, he held the office of Kazi and discharged his functions. Item Nos.1 and 2 in the plaint schedule were attached to the office of Kazi and was being enjoyed by B.K.Mohammed Jaffar. He sold a portion of Sy.No.633/D during 1970. Since patta in respect of the land granted by virtue of office of Kazi was not changed, an application was moved before the Tahsildar, Kollegal during April 1946. He held the proceedings and passed an order dated 21.03.1946 changing the patta in respect of item Nos.1 and 2 of the schedule in favour of the father of the plaintiffs. Accordingly, patta was issued in his name.

5. It is stated that B.K. Mohammed Khalandar-the father of the defendant in a clandestine manner instituted proceedings in MRT.No.515/62 and managed to obtain an order registering his name along with the name of the father of the plaintiffs as joint khatedar on 08.09.1953. The father of the plaintiffs after coming to know about this act of B.K.Mohammed Khalandar, raised dispute before the Tahsildar, Kollegal Taluk. After enquiry, the Tahsildar, Kollegal ordered for deletion of the name of B.K. Mohammed Khalandar as joint khatedar. The said proceedings became final and remained unchallenged.

6. The defendant, after the death of his father with an intention to grab the land made a representation to Jamabandi Officer for inclusion of his name. The proceedings were held rejecting his claim vide order dated 12.07.1972.

7. It is contended t