Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
Akkamahadevi, W/o. Sri. Siddaramappa H. – Appellant
Versus
Ministry Of Communication Employees Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd., Represented By Its President – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
This appeal by the appellant-plaintiff is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 21.01.2021 passed in O.S.No.26141/2017 by LVII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, Bangalore, whereby the said suit filed by the appellant- plaintiff against the respondents-defendants for permanent injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable property was dismissed by the Trial Court.
2. Though the matter is posted for orders, with the consent of both sides and the Trial Court Records having been received, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under:
(a) The appellant-plaintiff institutes the aforesaid suit for permanent injunction and other reliefs inter alia contending that he is the absolute owner in lawful and peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule immovable property having acquired the same from respondent No.1-Society under registered sale deed dated 25.01.1996 executed in her favour by the respondent No.1-Society. It is contended that the khata has been registered/made out in the name of the appellant by the BBMP
A plaintiff with lawful possession can seek an injunction against interference, and if ownership is disputed, they may need to prove title in a suit for declaration alongside injunction.
A suit for permanent injunction, without seeking a declaration of title, is not maintainable when ownership is disputed; a comprehensive claim is required to address possession and title.
In actions for injunctions, plaintiffs must demonstrate lawful possession and seek a declaration of title when ownership is disputed; failure to do so renders the suit unmaintainable.
Suit filed for perpetual injunction by plaintiff, when there is cloud over title is not maintainable.
In property disputes involving conflicting claims, the court must evaluate the evidence presented to determine the balance of convenience and the necessity for a trial to resolve ownership issues.
In property disputes, possession follows title; plaintiffs established a prima facie case warranting temporary injunction despite defendants' claims.
Possession established through admissions is sufficient for granting permanent injunction against unlawful interference.
The plaintiff's claim for possession, sought 29 years after the date of the registered sale deed, is barred by limitation and cannot be permitted.
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
