IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31^ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1328 OF 2009 (INJ)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI. JAYARAMA REDDY SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS A) SMT. B.R. SAROJAMMA, W/O LATE JAYARAMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS.

B) SMT. SHAMALA, W/O LATE RAVI KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

C) SRI. KARTHIK KUMAR, S/O LATE RAVI KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS.

D) SRI. YESHWANTH, S/O LATE RAVI KUMAR, Digitally signed AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS.

by PRASHANTH N V Location: H igh E) SRI. GURUVA REDDY, Court of Karnataka S/O LATE JAYARAMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

(A) TO (E) ARE R/AT. NO.248, OPP. WATER TANK, DEVARABISANA HALLI, BELLANDUR POST, BENGALURU - 560 103. F) SMT. BHAGYAMMA, W/O LATE JAYARAMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS.

G) SRI. ASHOK J S/O LATE JAYARAMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

H) SMT. SHAMALA J, D/O LATE JAYARAMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, I) SRI. ANIL KUMAR J, S/O LATE JAYARAMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS.

(F) TO (I) ARE AT NO.175, NEAR ANJANEYA SWAMY TEMPLE, DODDANAGAMANGALA, ELECTRONIC CITY POST, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 100.

…APPELLANTS (BY SRI. V. VISWANATHA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT -1 (A-I))

AND:

SRI. CHANDRAPPA REDDY AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS S/O OBALA REDDY, R/O DODDANAGAMANGALA VILLAGE, SINGASANDRA POST, BEGUR HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK (PLAINTIFF IN THE TRIAL COURT AND APPELLANT IN THE FIRST APPELLATE COURT)

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S.G. PARTHASARATHY, ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

THIS RSA IS FILED U/O 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:12.6.2009 PASSED IN RA.NO.152/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SESSIONS, JUDGE BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:6.1.2006 PASSED IN OS.NO.568/1998 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. II CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN), BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE.

THIS RSA, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA

ORAL JUDGMENT

The defendant in OS.No.568/1998 on the file of the learned II Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court', for short), is impugning the judgment and decree dated 12.06.2009 passed in RA.No.152/2006 on the file of the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-III, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'the First Appellate Court', for short), allowing the appeal, by setting aside the judgment and decree dated 06.01.2006 passed by the Trial Court and thereby decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for permanent injunction and restraining the defendant from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as per their rank and status before the Trial Court.

3. Facts of the case in brief are that, the plaintiff filed the suit O.S.No.568/1998 before the Trial Court seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the suit schedule property. The schedule appended to the plaint describes the piece and parcel of the property bearing Kaneshumari House list No.20/13 situated within the Gramatana of Doddanagamangala village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, measuring 10 guntas with the boundaries mentioned therein (hereinafter referred to as 'the schedule property'). It is contended by the plaintiff that the defendant is his brother and they are having two more brothers by name, Muniraju and Venkatesha Reddy. There was a partition between the brothers and the schedule property was allotted to the share of the plaintiff. Since then, the plaintiff is in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the schedule property.

4. It is contended that the defendant started interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of schedule property. The plaintiff filed the complaint with the police in that regard. In-spite of that the defendant was bent upon interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the suit