IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 385 OF 2023 (INJ)

BETWEEN:

1. SHIVAMMA W/O LATE VASURAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O MANNUVADDARAHALLI VILLAGE, KANAKATTE HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK -583 125.

2. REKHA W/O SURESH, D/O LATE VASURAPPA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O MANNUVADDARAHALLI VILLAGE, KANAKATTE HBOLI, ARSIKERE TALUK -583 125.

Digitally signed by B LAVANY A 3. SHASHIKALA Location: W/O ANANDABOVI, HIGH D/O LATE VASURAPPA, COURT OF AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, KARNATAKA R/O KALENAHALLIHATTI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK -583 125.

4. MOHAN KUMAR S/O LATE VASURAPPA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/O MANNUVADDARAHALLI VILLAGE, KANAKATTE HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK-583125.

…APPELLANTS (BY SRI. R. SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SHIVARAMANNA S/O SHIVALINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/O D.R.G. KOPPALU, KANAKATTE HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK-583125.

2. SHIVARAMANNA S/O SHIVALINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/O DODDARAMEGOWDANA KOPPALU, HOLALKERE POST, KANAKATTE HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK-583125.

…RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.12.2022 PASSED IN RA NO.24/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ARASIKERE, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.02.2018 PASSED IS OS NO.366/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ARASIKERE.

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 Sri.R.Shashidhara for the appellants.

2. This appeal is filed by the legal representatives of the defendant Sri.Hosurabovi. The appellants herein are questioning the judgment and decree rendered by the first appellate Court by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Arasikere in RA.No.24/2018 dated 01.12.2022, dismissing the appeal filed by the appellants herein and confirming the judgment and decree passed by the II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Arasikere in O.S.No.366/2010 dated

20.02.2018.

3. Parties to the proceedings shall be referred to as plaintiffs and defendants for the sake of brevity. The appellants, though legal representatives of the defendant, shall be considered as defendants.

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

It is the case of the plaintiffs before the trial Court that plaintiffs' father, namely Shivalingappa, purchased the suit schedule property from one Ramabovi, S/o Venkatabovi and minor children by name Hosurabovi by way of a registered sale deed dated 31.05.1946. It is further pleaded that plaintiffs' father purchased 2 acres 10 guntas towards southern side of survey No.204 totally comprising 4 acres 19 guntas. The first plaintiff did not get married, and second plaintiff was blind. Hence, for their maintenance, Shivalingappa who is the father of the plaintiffs executed registered settlement deed in favour of plaintiffs. It is further pleaded that plaintiffs sold 0-57 guntas of the eastern side in favour of Yallamma by way of registered sale deed and retained 0.35 guntas for their own purpose. The khatha and the revenue entries were shown in the name of the plaintiffs. Plaintiffs continued to be in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property, which was their only source of livelihood.

5. It is the case of the plaintiffs that this being the state of affairs, defendants who have no manner of right, title, or interest over the suit schedule property started interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs in the suit schedule property by claiming it to be their ancestral property and filed a petition under the SC/ST Act on 03.06.2007 before the District Commissioner and made an unlawful attempt to acquire the possession of the property. Left with no other alternative, plaintiffs filed suit for perpetual injunction.

6. Upon summons being issued, defendants appeared before the Court and filed the written state