Challenging judgment and decree dated 16.12.2013 in

R.A.No.6/2009 passed by Senior Civil Judge & JMFC., Kadur and

also judgment and decree dated 29.11.2008 passed in

O.S.No.258/2005 by Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) & JMFC., Kadur,

this appeal is preferred by appellants.

2. Appellants herein were defendants no.1 and 2 in

original suit and respondents no.1 and 2 in first appeal. While

respondent no.1 herein was plaintiff in suit and appellant in first

appeal. Respondents no.2 and 3 herein were defendants no.3

and 4 in suit and respondents no.3 and 4 in first appeal.

3. For sake of convenience, parties shall hereinafter

referred to as per their ranks in trial Court.

4. O.S.No.258/2005 filed seeking for relief of permanent

injunction

against

defendants

restraining

them

from

dispossessing plaintiff from land bearing Sy.No.149/P, old

no.784, measuring 4 acres out of total extent of 345 Acres and

05 guntas situated at Sakharayapatna village, Kadur Taluk

(for short 'suit property').

- 3 -

5.

In

plaint,

it

was

stated

that

Sy.No.784

of

Sakharayapatna village, Kadur Taluk, totally measuring 345

acres originally belonged to Government, assigned for cattle

grazing i.e., gomala banjarau land. Since 1981-1982 plaintiff was

in unauthorised cultivation of a portion of suit property to an

extent of 04 acres. It is further averred that government

confirmed unauthorised cultivation and issued grant certificate.

Plaintiff also claimed that he has filed Form no-53 for

confirmation of unauthorised cultivation, which was pending

before Land Grant Committee. It was further stated that plaintiff

had invested her labour and money for improving said land and

making it fit for cultivation and was growing crops in said

property for his livelihood. It was further stated that defendants

i.e., officials of Horticulture department no way concerned with

suit property, attempted to prevent plaintiff from cultivating

land. It was also stated that plaintiff along with others filed

W.P.Nos.33643/2000 to 33748/2000 before this Court for a

direction to Land Grant Committee to consider their applications

in Form no.53. It was stated that said writ petition was disposed

of with a direction to consider applications filed for regularisation

afresh within six months. It was also stated that during 2005 an

- 4 -

extent of 100 acres out of 345 acres and 05 guntas in old

Sy.No.784 was transferred in favour of Horticulture department.

However,

plaintiff

and

others

continued

in

unauthorised

cultivation of respective portions. As there was attempts by

defendants to interfere with plaintiff's possession and cultivation

of suit property, they were constrained to file suit.

6. Upon service of suit summons defendant no.1 filed

written statement admitting that land bearing survey no.784 of

Sakharayapatna village, measuring 345 acres belonged to

Government i.e., Forest Department. It was stated that 100

acres out of 345 acres 05 guntas, was released in favour of

Horticulture Department vide Government Order No.RD 84 LGH

76 dated 13.07.1977, Tahsildar, Kadur, handed over possession

of same. It was stated that since then defendant no.3 was

absolute owner and in peaceful possession of suit property. It

also denied unauthorised cultivation by plaintiff and others.

Defendants asserted that after grant, defendants had put up

fencing around suit property. Filing of form No.53 for

unauthorised

cultivation

or

confirmation

of

unauthorised

cultivation in respect of suit land was denied. It was further

stated that one Smt.Rathnamma had filed O.S.No.456/2000

- 5 -

against defendant restraining them from interfering with her

possession to an extent of 04 acres. After trial, said suit was

decreed. Taking advantage of said decree, it was alleged that

plaintiff was trying to take possession of suit property.

Defendants specifically disputed that plaintiff was in settled

position of suit schedule property and by denying other

averments sought for dismissal of suit.

7. Other d