Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
RAVI V HOSMANI, J
SRI VINOD REDDY, S/O LATE K.V. NARAYANA REDDY – Appellant
Versus
SRI K.M. KRISHNA REDDY, S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of property dispute (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments regarding ownership and possession (Para 8 , 10 , 12 , 14) |
| 3. legal principles governing adverse possession (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. court's observations on evidence and credibility (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 5. final conclusion and order of the court (Para 57) |
CAV JUDGMENT
Challenging judgment and decree dated 23.01.2007 passed by Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-II, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, in R.A.no.170/2003, this appeal is filed.
2. Brief facts as stated are, appellant was defendant no.2 in OS no.250/1994 filed by respondent no.1 (plaintiff) for permanent injunction restraining defendants, their agents, etc., from interfering with peaceful possession and enjoyment of property bearing house list no.40, khata no.26, measuring East to West - 80 ft. and North to South - 35 ft., situated at Kathiganur Village, Bidarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South (for short 'suit property') and restrain them from constructing bathroom and toilet in it.
3. In plaint, it was stated, plaintiff was absolute owner of suit property, inherited from his ancestors. After death of his father, names of plainti
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
