IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF MARCH 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 100517 OF 2018 (INJ)

BETWEEN:

1. MAHADEVAPPA S/O. KARABASAPPA SHIVANNANAVAR, AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HIREMORABA, TALUK: HIREKERUR, DISTRICT: HAVERI-581210.

2. SHIVAPPA S/O. KARABASAPPA SHIVANNANAVAR, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HIREMORABA, TALUK: HIREKERUR, DISTRICT: HAVERI-581210.

3. BASAVANNEPPA S/O. KARABASAPPA SHIVANNANAVAR, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, Digitally R/O. HIREMORABA, TALUK: HIREKERUR, signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI DISTRICT: HAVERI-581210.

Location:

HIGH COURT …APPELLANTS OF KARNATAKA, (BY SRI. AMIT A. ANANDHALLI, ADVOCATE FOR DHARWAD BENCH SRI. S.G. KADADAKATTI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

DANAPPA A/O. BHARAMAPPA GIJAGATTI, AGE: ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HIREMORAB, TALUK: HIREKERUR, DISTRICT: HAVERI-581210.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HANUMANTHAREDDY SAHUKAR, ADVOCATE)

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS; SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.04.2018 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HIREKERUR IN R.A.NO.51/2015 BY REVERSING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.07.2015 PASSED BY THE COURT OF PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HIREKERUR IN O.S.NO.145/2005 AND TO DISMISS THE SUIT BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL AND ETC.

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

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Even though the case is at the stage of admission, with the consent of both sides, heard on merits.

2. This is the appeal filed under Section 100 of CPC praying for setting aside the judgment and decree dated 16.04.2018 passed in R.A.No.51/2015 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hirekerur (for short, ‘First Appellate Court’), wherein the judgment and decree dated 29.07.2015 passed in O.S.No.145/2005 on the file of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Hirekerur (for short, ‘Trial Court’) is overruled by allowing the appeal and granting the relief of permanent injunction in favour of plaintiff against the defendants.

3. Parties would be referred with their ranks, as they were before the Trial Court for sake of convenience and clarity.

4. Plaintiff has filed the suit before the Trial Court praying for the relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment over suit schedule property and also restraining the defendants from trespassing over suit schedule property bearing Re-Sy.No.96/3 measuring 3 acres 30 guntas situated at Hiremoraba Village, Rattihalli Hobli, Hirekerur Taluk, Haveri District.

5. The case of plaintiff in nutshell is that suit schedule property was in possession and enjoyment of his adopted father since long time. After coming into force of Land Reforms Act, 1961 the adopted father of plaintiff, Sri Bhimappa Bharamappa Gijagatti has filed application to grant occupancy rights in his favour and it was granted as per order dated 23.11.1978 and then after paying premium amount, the grant certificate (Form No.10) was issued on 17.07.1981. After the death of adopted father of plaintiff, plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of suit schedule property.

6. Plaintiff was taken in adoption as per the customs prevailing in their community on 12.12.1979 and adoption deed was also registered. Thus, after the death of adopted father of plaintiff, as per M.E.No.2064 dated 27.01.1990, the name of plaintiff is mutated in revenue records in respect of suit schedule property. Then, RTCs. continued in his name. Defendants have given false information and got created sale deed dated 06.04.1979 for a sum of ₹.12,000/- and as per M.E.No.1524 dated 12.04.1979, they entered their names in the mutation register. It was against the prevailing Tenancy Act. Hence, it was dismissed. Father of defendants has not obtained any right, title under the said document. Father of defendants died on 28.02.2002. Even afterw