IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1826 OF 2024 (INJ)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI. R. SHANKAR, S/O. LATE RAMASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT THOTADAMANE, B.N. ROAD, GUNDLUPET TOWN, CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT-571 111.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. NAGARAJA R.C., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SRI. S. HASTIMAL JAIN, S/O. LATE SOHAN LAL, Digitally signed AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS, by DEVIKA M RESIDING AT T.B. COLONY, Location: HIGH G.P. RAJARATHNAM ROAD, COURT OF 3^RD WARD, 1^ST DIVISION, KARNATAKA GUNDLUPET TOWN, CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT-571 111.

…RESPONDENT THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.11.2024 PASSED IN R.A.NO.29/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, GUNDLUPET, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.09.2021 PASSED IN O.S.NO.148/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, GUNDLUPET.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

ORAL JUDGMENT

This matter is listed for admission. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.

2. This second appeal is filed against the concurrent finding.

3. The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiff before the Trial Court while seeking the relief of permanent injunction, it is contended that suit schedule ‘A’ property is purchased by the plaintiff’s father on 03.05.1973 and the defendant is interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule ‘B’ property. The suit schedule property is located in Gundlupet Town, which is morefully described in the schedule. It includes RCC building in the northern portion measuring 36 feet east-west and 48 feet north-south and vacant site in the southern portion measuring 45 feet east-west and 37 feet north-south. The western portion includes RCC building measuring 25 feet east-west and 37 feet north-south.

These properties belongs to the plaintiff. The plaintiff has been in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property properties from the date of purchasing of the suit schedule property. After the death of his father, the plaintiff continued the possession and enjoyment over the suit schedule properties. The plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit schedule properties and he is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same and no one else has any right over the suit schedule properties. The defendant attempted to encroach on the eastern portion of the plaint ‘B’ schedule property and unlawfully tried to construct a building and the same is resisted and hence filed the suit for the relief of bare injunction.

4. In pursuance of the suit summons, the defendant appeared and filed the written statement denying the averments made in the plaint. It is contended that this property was purchased from H.Sreekanthayya and his son H.S.Chandrashekhar, represented by their agent H.S.Ramachandra and is located at Gundlupet Town under Municipal Khatha No.421/233 and the same is bounded as east: vacant land belonging to Harish brothers and backyard of H.C.Narasimhamoorthy, south: house and vacant land of V.S.Govindaraya and vacant land of G.A.Nagesh, west: a lane (galli) shared by two parties and vacant land belonging to the plaintiff’s father, Ramashetty and north: Municipal road. This property measuring 13 meters east-west and 27.70 meters north-south, included an old residential house with a compound in the front and a backyard. The defendant obtained permission on 23.12.1998 to construct shops on this property. They built shops on half of the property (15 meters east-west and 26.70 meters north-south), but retained the southern portion as vacant land due to financial constraints. A compound wall also existed at the back of the property, which later deteriorated due to weather conditions. The defendant contend that the plaintiff misused the situation and encroached on the defe