IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1660 OF 2023 (INJ)

BETWEEN:

1. BASAVARAJU S/O KENCHANAIKA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS MUDDENAHALLI HONNAVALLI HOBLI TIPTUR TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572101 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. VINAYA KEERTHY M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA Digitally BENGALURU-560001 signed by B LAVANYA Location: 2. SECRETARY HIGH DEPT OF FORESTS COURT OF GOVT OF KARNATAKA KARNATAKA VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001

3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMAKURU DISTRICT TUMAKURU-572101

4. DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER TUMAKURU TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572101 5. RANGE FOREST OFFICER CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.S. GURUSWAMY, AGA)

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 12.06.2023 PASSED IN RA NO.30/2018 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TIPTUR., DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.02.2018 PASSED IN OS NO.127/2014 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TIPTUR.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

2. This appeal is preferred by the plaintiff challenging the judgment and decree passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC-Tiptur in RA.No.30/2018 dated 12.06.2023, dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant/plaintiff and confirming the judgment and decree dated 28.02.2018 passed by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC-Tiptur in O.S.No.127/2014.

3. Parties to the proceedings shall be referred to as plaintiff and defendants for the sake of brevity.

4. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

Plaintiff filed suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. It is the say of plaintiff that originally the suit schedule property belonged to Government of Karnataka. The Tahsildar Tiptur has granted the said suit land, in favour of plaintiff under a grant certificate dated 16.11.1996. It is also claimed by the plaintiff that he is possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property since from the date of grant, enjoying the same by changing the khata and other revenue entries in mutation entry number

16/1996-97.

5. He is also paying the land revenue on the suit property. It is the say of the plaintiff that the defendants have no manner of right, title, interest or possession over the suit schedule property. Defendants started to interfere more specifically; defendant No.5 was trying to encroach on the suit schedule property and attempted to trespass into the suit schedule property to dig in the suit schedule property without any notice to the plaintiff. Therefore, the plaintiff filed suit against the defendants for the relief of permanent injunction.

6. Upon service of the summons to the defendants, a written statement was filed by defendant No.5. The other defendants adopted the written statement of defendant No.5, denied the entire plaint averments, and pleaded that the suit is not maintainable in view of Section 80 of CPC and also under Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act 1980.

7. It was further pleaded that the Government of Mysore sanctioned land at Chikkanayakannahally and Tiptur Taluk measuring totally 3035 acres and 01 guntas, and the same was classified as 'A', 'B' and 'C' and named Kamalapura State Reserve Forest under Government notification. No. AF9044FT 195/49-4. It is also pleaded that the entire land is in possession of the government under the control of the Forest Department.

8. It is also pleaded that the plaintiff has created a grant certificate in collusion with the revenue officials without obtaining any necessary permission from the Forest Department and has attempted to encroach