1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

R.F.A.NO.1089/2016 (DEC)

C/W.

R.F.A.NO.377/2013 (RES)

IN R.F.A.NO.1089/2016:

BETWEEN:

M/S. RAGHAVENDRA ENTERPRISES

(A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM)

NO.106/1, JUMMA MASJID ROAD

BENGALURU-560 002

REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER:

* SESHMAL M. JAIN

S/O LATE MIYA CHAND JI

AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS

RESIDING AT NO.27/1, 1^ST FLOOR

BSK NIVAS, OBALAPPA CROSS

CHIKKA NALAVALI, BENGALURU-560 004.

… APPELLANT

(BY SRI A.Y.N.GUPTA ADVOCATE &

SRI N.V.NAGESH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI T.N.DAKSHINAMURTHY

S/O LATE T.NARAYANASWAMY

AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS

RESIDING AT NO.106/1,

4^TH FLOOR, JUMMA MASJID ROAD

BENGALURU-560 002.

... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI M.V.CHANDRASHEKARA REDDY, ADVOCATE C/R)

* Corrected vide Chamber order dated 17.09.2022

2

THIS R.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.04.2016

PASSED IN O.S.NO.2528/2004 ON THE FILE OF THE XXV

ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU,

DECREEING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND POSSESSION.

IN R.F.A.NO.377/2013:

BETWEEN:

M/S. RAGHAVENDRA ENTERPRISES

NO.106/1, JUMMA MASJID ROAD

BENGALURU-560 002

REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNERS:

1. MR.RAGHAVENDRA SWAMY

S/O SRI.N.R.N.SETTY

2. MR.SESHMAL M. JAIN

S/O LATE MIYA CHAND JI

… APPELLANTS

(BY SRI A.Y.N.GUPTA ADVOCATE &

SRI J.ARAVIND BABU, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SRI T.N.DAKSHINAMURTHY

S/O LATE T.NARAYANASWAMY

AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS

RESIDING AT 4^TH FLOOR

NO.106/1, OLD NO.23/206

JUMMA MASJID ROAD

BENGALURU-02.

2. SRI T.D.NAGARAJ

S/O SRI T.N.DAKSHINAMURTHY

AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS

RESIDING AT 4^TH FLOOR

NO.106/1, OLD NO.23/206

JUMMA MASJID ROAD

BENGALURU-02.

3

3. SRI T.D.RAVIVARMA

S/O SRI T.N.DAKSHINAMURTHY

AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

RESIDING AT 4^TH FLOOR

NO.106/1, OLD NO.23/206

JUMMA MASJID ROAD

BENGALURU-02.

4. SRI T.D.MURALI MOHAN

S/O SRI T.N.DAKSHINAMURTHY

AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS

RESIDING AT 4^TH FLOOR

NO.106/1, OLD NO.23/206

JUMMA MASJID ROAD

BENGALURU-02.

5. SRI T.D.SATISH

S/O SRI T.N.DAKSHINAMURTHY

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS

RESIDING AT 4^TH FLOOR

NO.106/1, OLD NO.23/206

JUMMA MASJID ROAD

BENGALURU-02.

6. SMT.VANAJAKSHAMMA

W/O SRI T.N.DAKSHINAMURTHY

MAJOR BY AGE

RESIDING AT 4^TH FLOOR

NO.106/1, OLD NO.23/206

JUMMA MASJID ROAD

BENGALURU-02.

... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI M.V.CHANDRASHEKARA REDDY, ADVOCATE C/R)

THIS R.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.12.2012

PASSED IN O.S.NO.4520/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE XXV

ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU

CITY AND ETC.

4

THESE APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED

FOR JUDGMENT ON 06.09.2021 THIS DAY, THE COURT

PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

J U D G M E N T

The appeal in R.F.A.No.1089/2016 is filed challenging the

judgment

and

decree

dated

23.04.2016

passed

in

O.S.No.2528/2004 on the file of the XXV Additional City Civil and

Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City decreeing the suit directing the

appellant/defendant to deliver the vacant possession of the suit

schedule property to the respondent/plaintiff within four months

from the date of the order.

2.

The appeal in R.F.A.No.377/2013 is filed challenging

the

judgment

and

decree

dated

07.12.2012

passed

in

O.S.No.4520/2002 on the file of the XXV Additional City Civil

Judge, Bengaluru City dismissing the suit filed by the

appellants/plaintiffs for the relief of declaration and possession.

3.

The parties are referred to as per their original

rankings before the Trial Court to avoid the confusion and for the

convenience of the Court.

5

4.

The factual matrix of the case in O.S.No.2528/2004

in nutshell that the plaintiff, being the Kartha of the joint family,

along with his sons executed a registered lease deed dated

18.01.1989 in favour of the defendant