JUDGMENT

Defendant Nos. 2 to 6 in OS No.603/1998 have approached this Court in appeal assailing the judgment of the learned XIV Additional City Civil Judge (CCH No.28), Bangalore, dated 19-07-2005, whereby the suit of plaintiff/respondent No.1 (now represented by his LRs) came to be decreed declaring that he is the owner of the suit schedule properties and he is entitled for possession of the same.

2. The parties would be referred to as per their ranks before the trial Court for the sake of convenience.

3. The factual matrix of the case which are relevant for the purpose of this appeal are as below:

The plaintiff-Muniyappa contended in his plaint that he is the absolute owner of the suit schedule properties which are pieces of lands measuring 115 feet East to West and 62 feet North to South, bearing katha No.18, House List No.21/3 and the piece of the land measuring 66 feet East to West and 56 feet North to South bearing katha No.38/2 House List No.11, both situated at Kariyammana Agrahara, Varthur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk.

4. Plaintiff contended that the land bearing Survey No.1/1 (Old No. 2) measuring 01 acre 14 guntas, situated at Kariyammana Agrahara, Varthur Hobli, was purchased by plaintiff's forefather and they continued in possession of the same. One Venkatappa, the great grandfather of the plaintiff had three sons by name Papaiah, Muniswamy and Thippaiah. Papaiah and Thippaiah were not married and only Muniswamy was married and he had a son by name Muniswamaiah. The said Muniswamaiah had two sons namely, Venkatappa and the plaintiff herein Muniyappa. The brother of the plaintiff- Venkatappa died issueless. The grandfathers of the plaintiff i.e., Papaiah and Thippaiah had bequeathed their properties in favour of their brother's grand children namely, plaintiff and his brother Venkatappa under a Will dated 22-06-1937. The said Will mentioned the extent of Old Survey No.2, New Survey No.1/1 as measuring 01 acre 14 guntas. The said property was in the name of Thippaiah, the brother of plaintiff's grandfather i.e., Muniswamy. The land was an Inam land and when the Inam Abolition Act came into force, the Special Tahsildar prepared the list of the holders of Inam land in the year 1959. In the course of resurvey and settlement, the Old Survey No.2 was renumbered as Survey No.1. Under order dated 29-12-1964 the said land was regranted with new survey number. The measurement by Survey Authorities took place in the year 1956 and at that time, the limit of gramathana was extended to the 15 guntas in the New Survey No.1.

Therefore, after deducting the said 15 guntas from Survey No.1, the remaining 39 guntas remained with new Survey No.1/1 and they continued in possession of the same. 5. It was contended that the house constructed by the grandfather of the plaintiff became dilapidated and later it collapsed due to passing of time and the land measuring 15 guntas which was included in gramathana also remained in possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff. The Panathur village Panchayat gave three numbers to the plaintiff's gramathana land and kept the land in the name of the plaintiff. Defendant No.1 and father of defendant Nos. 2 to 4 have no right title or interest over the said land measuring 15 guntas. But they created some documents fraudulently with the help of Village Panchayat and Revenue Officials and got katha changed in their name illegally. The said fact came to the knowledge of the plaintiff on 24-08-1993 when he obtained the copies of mutation register and also copies of the revenue records from the Panathur Village Panchayat. Thereafter, he came to know about the illegal mutation entries in the name of defendant No.1 to the extent of 100 feet x 60 feet and in the name of Subbaiah, the father of defendant Nos. 2 to 4 in the respect of land measuring 56 feet x 50 feet. Defendant No.1 had sold the property which was in his name in favour of defendant Nos. 5 and 6 by executing the sale deed in the year 1991 selling the pr