IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1133 OF 2012 BETWEEN:

SRI SRINIVAS REDDY @ MARI REDDY S/O LATE B VENKATASWAMY REDDY, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O NO. 343/3, 1^ST FLOOR, 10^TH MAIN, 100 FEET ROAD, B V REDDY CORNER, DODDA BANASAWADI, BANGALORE-560 068.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. SRIKAR KRISHNA B.R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. A. SAMPATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT. S. SUGUNA Digitally signed by W/O. K. NARAYANA REDDY, SUMA B N Location: AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, HIGH COURT OF R/O NO.12, 1^ST CROSS, KARNATAKA LAL BAHADUR NAGAR, B. CHENNASANDRA, BANGALORE - 560 043.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. JANARDHANA G., ADVOCATE FOR C/R)

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 03.04.2012 PASSED IN O.S.1692/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDL.

CITY CIVIL JUDGE (CCH:15), BANGALORE, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is by the defendant being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 03.04.2012 passed in Original Suit No. 1692/2008 on the file of VIII Additional City Civil Judge (CCH15), at Bengaluru by which, the suit of the plaintiff for permanent injunction is decreed as prayed for.

2. Subject matter of the suit is property being house site bearing BBMP No.2A, old House List No.772/1 situated at 10th Main, 100 Ft. BDA Road, Banaswadi, Bangalore, measuring East-West on the Northern side-6 feet, on the Southern side-52 feet and North-South on the Eastern side-70 feet and on the Western side-65 feet, with boundaries,-

EAST: Anniah Reddy Property, WEST: 100 Ft. BDA Road and 10^th Main Road;

NORTH: Road and Anniah Reddy Property;

SOUTH: Remaining land of Venkataswamy Reddy property now in possession of Defendant."

3. The case of the plaintiff is that the said property originally belonged to one B.Venkataswamy Reddy, who conveyed the same in favour of the plaintiff in terms of deed of sale dated 15.05.1989 and delivered the possession to the plaintiff. Plaintiff obtained her name registered / mutated in the revenue records of the then Banaswadi Grama Panchayath, later, in the records of Bangalore City Corporation. The Bangalore City Corporation has assigned Municipal No.2A to the schedule property after collecting the betterment charges. The plaintiff has been paying the property tax over the same. Plaintiff while preparing for putting up construction over the suit property, defendant interfered with her possession claiming rights adverse to interest of the plaintiff, constraining her to file the suit for injunction.

4. Written Statement filed by the defendant denying the plaint averments, contented that suit property formed part of land is No.345 of Banaswadi, which belonged to father of the defendant, namely B.Venkataswamy Reddy. Plaintiff who was otherwise, related to the family of the defendant, taking undue advantage of the relationship, fabricated the document. There was no consideration passed on, in terms of the document. The said sale deed is sham, nominal and inconsequential.

5. It is further contended that part of the land bearing Sy.No.345 was under Notification for acquisition issued by the Bangalore Development Authority between the year 1977 to 1993. As such, the father of the defendant could not have conveyed valid title in favour of the plaintiff. A Will dated 02.02.1995 was executed by said B.Venkataswamy Reddy, bequeathing the suit property in favour of Vinaykumar Reddy, who is the son of the defendant. Said Vinaykumar Reddy had demolished the shed that was existing on the suit property and had made arrangement to put up construction of a new building thereon. The revenue records standing in the name of B.Venkataswamy Reddy. That since the title was not conveyed, even if it was any, stood extinguished in the light of Provisions of Sections 27 and 28 of the Limitation Act