Back
HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 2249 OF 2006 C/W REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 2072 OF 2006 IN RSA No. 2249/2006:
BETWEEN:
11. MURTHAPPA S/O MUNISWAMAPPA DEAD ON 02.05.2023 HIS LRs ARE AS FOLLOWS:
1(A). JAYAMMA W/O. MURTHAPPA AGE: 70 YEAR, R/AT: GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHALDHIGAANAHALLI (P), SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAT DIST.
1(B). NAGARATNAMMA D/O. MURTHAPPA AGE: 55 YEAR, KABHIRA ROAD, SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAT DIST.
Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR 1(C). MUNISWAMIGOWDA S/O. MURTHAPPA LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH AGE: 53 YEAR, R/AT: GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH KASABA HOBLI, CHALDHIGAANAHALLI (P), SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAT DIST. 1(D). NILAMMA D/O. MURTHAPPA AGE: 50 YEAR, R/AT: GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHALDHIGAANAHALLI (P), SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAT DIST.
1(E). G.M.RAVINDRA S/O. MURTHAPPA AGE: 48 YEAR, R/AT: GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHALDHIGAANAHALLI (P), HC-KAR SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAT DIST.
…APPELLANTS (BY SRI. VIJAY KUMAR R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
RAMAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY LR’s., 1. GOWRAMMA D/O. RAMAPPA W/O. GURAPPA, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SRINIVASPUR TALUK, KOLAR DIST-563101.
2. NARAYANASWAMY S/O. RAMAPPA AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: RAILWAY POLICE CONSTABLE, BANGARPET, DIST: KOLAR-563101.
3. AKKEMMA D/O. RAMAPPA AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. SINGANAHALLI, GANJUR POST, TALUK: CHINTAMANI, DIST: KOLAR-563101.
4. CHANNAPPA S/O. RAMAPPA AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SRINIVASPUR TALUK, KOLAR DIST-563101.
5. NARAYANASWAMY S/O. MUNIVENKATAPPA AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRI., R/O. 1/22, SAROJA ROAD, SRINIVASPUR, TALUK SRINIVASPUR, DIST KOLAR-563101.
GOVINDAPPA SINCEDE BY HIS LRs., 6. LALITHAMMA W/O. GOVINDAPPA AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD.
HC-KAR
7. AMARNATH S/O. GOVINDAPPA AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE.
8. GEETHA D/O. GOVINDAPPA AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD.
9. PUSHPA D/O. GOVINDAPPA AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, RESPONDENTS 6 TO 9 ARE R/O. MAIN ROAD, KAIWARA VILLAGE, CHINTHAMANI TALUK, KOLAR DIST.
RANGAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY LR’s., 10. MUNIVENKATAMMA W/O. RANGAPPA AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KODICHERUVU VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, TALUK SRINIVASPUR, DIST: KOLAR.
VENKATAMMA SINCE DECEASED BY LR’s.
11. MUNIYAPPA S/O. PAPANNA OCC: AGRICULTURE.
12. MUTHAPPA S/O. MUNIYAPPA OCC: AGRICULTURE, 13. NAGA S/O. MUNIYAPPA OCC: AGRICULTURE, RESPONDENTS NO.11 TO 13 ARE R/O. VADIGENAHALLI VILLAGE, YELDUR HOBLI, SRINIVASAPUR TK, KOLAR DIST.
NOTE: RESPONDENTS NO.11 AND 13 ARE DEAD AND REPRESENTED BY THEIR LEGAL HEIR RESPONDENT NO.12 MUTHAPPA S/O. MUNIYAPPA, HC-KAR AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE.
14. ACHAMMA W/O. SEENAPPA AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. GUTTAHALLI VILLAGE, TQ: CHINTHAMANI, DIST: KOLAR.
15. LAKSHMAMMA W/O. KRISHNAPPA AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KAIWARA VILLAGE, TQ: CHINTHAMANI, DIST: KOLAR. 16. RANGAPPA S/O. KAVETAPPA AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, KODICHERUVU VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, TQ: SRINIVASPUR, DIST: KOLAR.
VENKATARAMAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY LR’s., 17. RAMAPPA S/O. LATE VENKATARAMAPPA AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRI., 18. NARAYANAPPA S/O. LATE VENKATARAMAPPA, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRI., 19. JAYAMMA D/O. LATE VENKATARAMAPPA, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRI., 20. MANJULA D/O. LATE VENKATARAMAPPA, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRI., 21. SRINIVASAPPA S/O. VENKATARAMAPPA, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRI., 22. GOPALAPPA HC-KAR S/O. VENKATARAMAPPA, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRI., RESPONDENTS NO.17 TO 22 ARE R/O. GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SRINIVASPUR TK, KOLAR DIST-563101.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. Y.R.SADASHIVA REDDY, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR R1 TO R4;
SMT. SOWMYA R., ADVOCATE FOR R20;
NOTICE TO R5 TO R19 AND R22 ARE SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED; R21 IS DECEASED)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.4.2006 PASSED IN R.A.NO.82/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE AND PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT-III, KOLAR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 6.2.2002 PASSED IN OS.NO. 21/1992 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.), SRINIVASPUR.
IN RSA NO. 2072/2006:
BETWEEN:
1. SRIRAMAPPA S/O. LATE VENKATARAMAPPA, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRI.
22. NARAYANAPPA S/O. LATE VENKATARAMAPPA, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRI.
33. JAYAMMA D/O. LATE VENKATARAMAPPA, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD.
HC-KAR
44. MANJULA D/O LATE VENKATARAMAPPA AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD.
55. SRINIVASAPPA S/O. LATE VENKATARAMAPPA, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s ARE AS FOLLOWS, 5(A). MUNIVENKATAMMA W/O. SRINIVASAPPA AGE: 67 YEARS, R/AT: GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHALDHIGAANAHALLI(P), SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAR DIST-563101.
5(B). SHOBHABATHAMMA G.S.
D/O. SRINIVASAPPA, AGE: 48 YEARS, R/AT: THINNALI VILLAGE, HOGALAGERE(P), SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAR DIST.
5(C). SHUBHAVEENA D/O. SRINIVASAPPA AGE: 43 YEARS, R/AT: CHIRUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, NAMBIHALLI (P), SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAR DIST.
5(D). G.S.RADHA D/O. SRINIVASAPPA AGE: 40 YEARS, R/AT: THINNALI VILLAGE, HOGALAGERE(P), SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAR DIST.
5(E). G.S.VEDA D/O. SRINIVASAPPA AGE: 38 YEARS, R/AT: GUNDAMANATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHALDIGAANAHALLI(P), SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAR DIST.
66. GOPALAPPA S/O. LATE VENKATARAMAPPA AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRI., HC-KAR ALL ARE R/O. GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SRINIVASPUR TK, KOLAR DIST-563101.
...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. AKKAMAHADEVI HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
RAMAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY LR’s., 1. GOWRAMMA D/O. RAMAPPA W/O. GURAPPA, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SRINIVASPUR TALUK, KOLAR DIST-563101.
2. NARAYANASWAMY S/O. RAMAPPA AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: RAILWAY POLICE CONSTABLE, BANGARPET, DIST: KOLAR-563101.
3. AKKEMMA D/O. RAMAPPA AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. SINGANAHALLI, GANJUR POST, TALUK: CHINTAMANI, DIST: KOLAR-563101.
4. CHANNAPPA S/O. RAMAPPA AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SRINIVASPUR TALUK, KOLAR DIST-563101.
5. NARAYANASWAMY S/O. MUNIVENKATAPPA AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRI., R/O. 1/22, SAROJA ROAD, SRINIVASPUR, TALUK SRINIVASPUR, DIST KOLAR-563101.
6. LALITHAMMA W/O. GOVINDAPPA AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD.
HC-KAR
77. AMARNATH S/O. GOVINDAPPA AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE.
88. GEETHA D/O. GOVINDAPPA AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD. 9. PUSHPA D/O. GOVINDAPPA AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, RESPONDENTS 6 TO 9 ARE R/O. MAIN ROAD, KAIWARA VILLAGE, CHINTHAMANI TALUK, KOLAR DIST.
RANGAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY LR’s., 10. MUNIVENKATAMMA W/O. RANGAPPA AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KODICHERUVU VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, TALUK SRINIVASPUR, DIST: KOLAR.
11. MUNIYAPPA S/O. PAPANNA (SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s.)
12. MUTHAPPA S/O. MUNIYAPPA OCC: AGRICULTURE, 13. NAGA S/O. MUNIYAPPA (SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s)
RESPONDENTS NO.11 TO 13 ARE R/O. KODICHERUVU VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SRINIVASPUR TK, KOLAR DIST.
NOTE: RESPONDENTS NO.11 AND 13 ARE DEAD AND REPRESENTED BY THEIR LEGAL HEIR RESPONDENT NO.12 MUTHAPPA S/O. MUNIYAPPA, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE.
HC-KAR
14. ACHAMMA W/O. SEENAPPA AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. GUTTAHALLI VILLAGE, TQ: CHINTHAMANI, DIST: KOLAR.
15. LAKSHMAMMA W/O. KRISHNAPPA AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KAIWARA VILLAGE, TQ: CHINTHAMANI, DIST: KOLAR.
16. RANGAPPA S/O. KAVETAPPA AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, KODICHERUVU VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, TQ: SRINIVASPUR, DIST: KOLAR.
17. MURTHAPPA S/O MUNISWAMAPPA (SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR’s)
17(A). JAYAMMA W/O. MURTHAPPA AGE: 70 YEAR, R/AT: GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHALDHIGAANAHALLI (P), SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAT DIST.
17(B). NAGARATNAMMA D/O. MURTHAPPA AGE: 55 YEAR, KABHIRA ROAD, SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAT DIST.
17(C). MUNISWAMIGOWDA S/O. MURTHAPPA AGE: 53 YEAR, R/AT: GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHALDHIGAANAHALLI (P), SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAT DIST.
17(D). NILAMMA D/O. MURTHAPPA AGE: 50 YEAR, R/AT: GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHALDHIGAANAHALLI (P), SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAT DIST.
17(E). G.M.RAVINDRA S/O. MURTHAPPA AGE: 48 YEAR, R/AT: GUNDAMANATHA VILLAGE, HC-KAR KASABA HOBLI, CHALDHIGAANAHALLI (P), SRINIVASAPURA TK, KOLAT DIST.
...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. Y.R.SADASHIVA REDDY, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR R1 TO R4;
SRI. K.LOKESH, ADVOCATE FOR R12;
SRI. VIJAY KUMAR R., ADVOCATE FOR R17(A) TO R17(E); NOTICE TO R5 TO R10 AND R14 TO R16 ARE SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED VIDE ORDER DATED 06.11.2009;
R12 IS TREATED AS LR’s OF R11 VIDE ORDER DATED 04.01.2011; R12 IS TREATED AS LR’s OF R13)
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S 100 CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.4.2006 PASSED IN RA.NO. 58/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE & PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT III, KOLAR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 6.2.2002 PASSED IN OS.NO. 21/1992 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) & JMFC, SRINIVASPUR.
THESE APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 25.07.2025 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
CAV JUDGMENT
1. These Regular Second Appeals are against the concurrent findings in a suit for declaration and injunction and possession in the alternative. The suit is decreed granting the relief of declaration of title and injunction.
2. Against the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court, two Regular Appeals are filed i.e., R.A. No.82/2002 by defendant No.8 and R.A. No. 58/2002 by legal representatives of defendant No.5 and defendants No.6 and 7. Both Regular Appeals are dismissed by a common judgment.Hence these two second appeals.
3. Defendant No.8 in the suit filed R.S.A. No.2249/2006 and defendants No.5 (a to d), 6 and 7 have filed R.S.A. No. 2072/2006.
4. The suit property is Sy.No. 62 measuring 1 acre 29 Guntas in Gundamanta Village, Shrinivasapura Taluk. The plaintiff claims to have purchased the suit property under a registered sale deed dated 18.08.1986. His vendor is Hanumappa and plaintiff’s vendor claims to have purchased the property from Seetaramaiah Shetty under registered sale deed dated 01.02.1962. The original vendor Seerataramaiah Shetty is said to be the grantee of the land.
5. It is relevant to notice the land granted to plaintiff’s vendor’s vendor Seerataramaiah Shetty is Sy.No.1 measuring 2 acres. The grantee sold land in Sy.No.1 measuring 2 acres. The plaintiff claims to have purchased 1 acre and 29 guntas in the said Sy.No.1. However, the property mentioned in the sale deed dated 18.08.1986 is Sy.No.62 and not Sy.No.1.
6. The plaintiff claims that Sy.No.1 is renumbered as Sy.No.62. Thus, he traces the title of his vendor’s vendor to the grant order in respect of Sy.No.1 and thereby claims title and possession over the property.
7. The defendants have contested the suit. Defendant Nos.1 to 4, 5 to 7 and defendant No.8 have filed separate written statements. The defendants essentially contend that the plaintiff is claiming right over the property bearing Sy.No.47 which according to them is not carved out from Sy.No.1 or 47 and said Sy.No.47 is distinct from Sy.No.1 and 62.
8. The plaintiff’s claim that Sy.No.1 is renumbered as Sy.No.62 is denied. The further claim (developed during the trial) that Sy.No.1 is renumbered as 47, and later renumbered as 62, is also denied by the defendants.
9. Defendants contend that they are in possession of Sy.No.47, a Government waste land, since many years as unauthorised occupants, and their application seeking regularisation of unauthorised occupation is pending consideration.
10. The Trial Court and the First Appellate Court have held that the plaintiff has established the title and possession. Defendants’ contention that the property bearing Sy.No.47 is not part of Sy.No.1 or 62 is rejected by both Courts.
11. On 17.10.2006, the appeals were admitted and following substantial questions of law was framed:
"Whether the Courts below were justified in granting a decree in favour of the plaintiff when there is variance in the boundaries mentioned in Ex.P1, P2 and P6?"
12. The learned predecessor of this Court vide order dated 05.03.2022 felt that the evidence is not sufficient to resolve the controversy and framed two additional issues as noted below:
i) Whether the property claimed by the plaintiff and its boundaries lay within Sy.No.1 of Gundamanha village, Kasaba Hobli, Srinivasapura Taluk?
ii) Whether property bearing Sy.No.62 of Gundamanha village is demarcated are carved out of the erstwhile survey No.47 of the said village?
13. After framing the aforementioned two questions, this Court directed the parties to place evidence before the Trial Court on the said two issues and secured the findings of the Trial Court.
14. The Trial Court, after considering the additional evidence led by the parties on the aforementioned two issues, gave a finding on first additional issue, holding that the plaintiff did not establish that the suit property is part of Sy.No.1.
15. As far as second additional issue, the Trial Court held that Sy.No.62 is not carved out of Sy.No.47.
16. Thus, both is
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
