Ownership must be established through substantial evidence; mere possession and prior admissions are insufficient to prove title in property disputes.

JUDGMENT :

V.SRISHANANDA, J.

1. Heard Sri. Vishwanath Hegde, learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondent.

2. Unsuccessful plaintiffs are the appellants challenging the dismissal of the suit in OS No.15147/2005 on the file of Additional City Civil Judge, Mayo Hall, Bangalore.

3. Facts in the brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present appeal are as under:

3.1 A suit came to be filed by the plaintiff in respect of the following property (hereinafter referred to as 'suit property'):

DESCRIPTION

All the part and parcel of the property No.24, 'E' No.4th Street, Old Madres Road, Ulsoor, Bangalore 560 008, measuring east to west on the Northern side 22 feet inches 21, 3 inches on the southern side: North to South on East 27 feet 4 inches, on the West 29 feet 6 inches, totally measuring 617.5 Sq.ft encroached by the defendants measuring 221.4 sq.ft as shown and bounded on east by wide passage: West by Road "E" No.4th Street, North by House No.23 and South by House No.25.

3.2 The suit is filed with a prayer for declaration that the plaintiffs are the owners of the suit property and an order of permanent injunction and eviction of seventh defendant from the portion of the suit property including the damages.

3.3 Plaintiff's contended that Sri. Gambuswamy, was the owner of the suit property. He had a brother by name Muthuswamy who died issueless was the owner of the property. Gambuswami had two sons namely Lokanathan and Nateshan. Nateshan is the father of the plaintiffs. Lokanathan had six children and after the death of Gambaswamy, there was a oral partition between Lokanathan and the Nateshan and the suit property had fallen to the share of Sri. G. Nateshan.

3.4 It is further contended that as per the oral partition between Nateshan and Lokanathan, the suit property which had fallen to the share of Nateshan, ASri. Nateshan lived along with his wife Papammal in the suit property.

3.5 Lokanathan said to have died on 08.10.1971 and Nateshan said to have died on 30.08.1981.

3.6 It is further contented that during the lifetime of Lokanathan, he had sold the property bearing No.23 'E' 4^th Street, Ulsoor in favour of G. Ramachandran. Eight defendant is the daughter of Lokanathan and seventh defendant is her husband. Lokanathan and Nateshan were enjoying the respective properties as per the oral partition and Lokanathan having sold his property, is not having any right, title or interest over the suit property.

3.7 Therefore, it is the Nateshan who is the absolute owner of the suit property, who has paid taxes to the suit property and obtained electrical connection in his name, but the katha of the property stood in the name of Sri Lokanathan, who are the elder brother out of respect.

3.8 It is further contented that an earlier suit was filed in OS No.10596/1987, wherein it is observed that defendants No.10 to 15 in the present suit were in possession of the suit property.

3.9 It was also contented by the plaintiffs that in the said suit in paragraph No.14, it has been observed that the said property belonging to Nateshan and there was no material evidence placed on record. As such, taking advantage of the observation made in the judgment of OS No.10596/1987, Corporation Authorities refused to transfer the katha of the suit property in the name of the plaintiffs and advised the plaintiffs to obtain a declaratory decree and thus suit came to be filed.

3.10 Pursuant to the suit summons, defendants No.1 to 6 appeared before the Court and filed common written statement wherein they admit