JUDGMENT

The defendant (since deceased represented by his legal representatives) in O.S.No.27/1998 on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr. Dvn.), Ramdurg (henceforth referred to as 'Trial Court') has filed this Regular Second Appeal aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 08.12.2008 passed therein as well as the confirming judgment and decree dated 19.06.2009 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Dvn.), Ramdurg (henceforth referred to as 'First Appellate Court') in R.A.No.6/2009.

2. The parties shall henceforth be referred to as they were arrayed before the Trial Court. The appellant was the defendant and the respondent was the plaintiff before the Trial Court.

3. The suit in O.S.No.27/1998 was filed for declaration that the alleged sale deed dated 21.02.1992 executed in favour of defendant was null and void and for recovery of possession of the suit property, which was agricultural land bearing Sy.No.476/2 situate at Katkol village, measuring 2 acres 5 guntas. The plaintiff claimed that he was Pattadhikari and the Trustee of Shri. Hiremath of Katkol Trust, which was a Public Trust. He claimed that on 29.06.1952 an order was passed by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Belgaum, in Enquiry No.8946/1952, where the Assistant Charity Commissioner held that Shri. Hiremath of Katkol Trust was a Public Charitable Trust and was registered at Sl.No.A-3109. He claimed that prior to him, a person named, Sri. Basavaraj Gurubasayya @ Padadayya Hiremath (also called as 'Sri. Basavaraj Swamy') was the trustee of the Trust. He claimed that Sri. Basavaraj Gurubasayya had indulged in immoral activities and had brought the Trust to disrepute. Therefore, the elders of the village enquired with him who spilled the beans that he had executed a relinquishment deed in favour of the elders of Veerashaiva Samaja of Katkol on 28.01.1995. Consequently, he stepped down from the Peetadhipathi of Hiremath Katkol Trust and the Mutt. Thereafter, the disciples of the Mutt appointed the plaintiff as the Pattadhikari as per a declaration dated 12.04.1995, which was approved by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Belgaum in Enquiry No.701/1995 and change was ordered in the PTR as per the order dated 29.09.1995. Thus, he claimed that he was the Chief Trustee of Sri. Hiremath Trust of Katkol. He claimed that the erstwhile trustee had executed a sale deed dated 21.02.1992 in favour of the defendant in respect of the suit property and had conveyed it for a sum of Rs.10,000/-. He alleged that the defendant had conspired with the earlier Peetadhipathi to cause loss to the Trust and to benefit from it. He alleged that the defendant did not pay any consideration and no amount was deposited in the Account of the Trust. Hence, he claimed that the sale did not bind the plaintiff or the Trust. He alleged that no permission was taken from the office of the Charity Commissioner, Belgaum, before alienating the suit property and hence, it was in violation of the law and therefore, was unenforceable. He claimed that based on the sale deed, the defendant got his name entered in the revenue records as per M.E.No.9629 dated 18.04.1992. The plaintiff claimed that he requested the defendant to re-convey the property to the Trust and as the defendant refused to do so, he was constrained to institute the suit for a decree of declaration that the sale deed dated 21.02.1992 executed in favour of the defendant was null and void and not binding upon the Trust as well as the plaintiff and for recovery of possession of the suit property.

4. The suit was contested by the defendant who denied the averments of the plaint generally. He claimed that he had purchased the suit property after conducting due diligence. He claimed that the public records such as the record of rights and mutation entries pertaining to the land bearing Sy.No.476/2 indicated that Sri. Basavaraj Swamy was the owner in possession and enjoyment of the suit property. He claimed that he thereafter offered to purchase the suit propert