High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Savitramma vs Nagarajappa on 15 September, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Smt Savitramma vs Nagarajappa on 15 September, 2009
Author: K.N.Keshavanarayana


….wu.-awn: «sum-an

Vtv=*WiV’£Wl’€M¥1 W awanwwmfimmm mwm ammww U?” %mW’%:§&’E”£¢?¢.Kfi wawsm msam” 0%? %%%WW?fl§€fi WW4 C

THE H$H’BLE HR JUS$ICE_HK_R K3§$&§§§§g3zA3§* ”

1! TE Isa can: at “”~H”~~

a% gg gggagnenm
DATEE wxzs THE 15″ 93: GE $E§ag33§=2§5§

SE EQRE

R.S.A. Hm. 2Q3}_§¥u2§$a* Vf;_v~A

1 %’I’ $A¥fI’.I’E.$-tllfi

.- Ht,’

$59 VENKAT§B?& , , =,
EGEE ABQ§T as ¥EAR3g,’;k 7_
Rffi V.EALYA v:LiasE*; *”

HIEEG$§T§RUR_H¢B££. , . =,
cfizmagaagga;rAL§g~s??5s1;1~

vEEKa§a§%§_”I,, ,1L’
sz3_$EIgnAp§gTa3fi’*

.Aagn=gsds£.53 ?EARs~~°
{R/A_?;§ALfA*VZLLAGE
“§IfiEG§R?fiRUR_HQBLI

cm;T3a§gge§ razfik ~57?5e1.
=u – – 2 =.7 .. APPELLEfiT$

‘a:j’gB$ §RKaMKABHfiK£E.§ABIG; Ammcams ;

§§éa§§¢&?A

fiffifflflfifififi;KE¥fiRRVEEEA§§A

” .53 YE£RS,AGRICULT§K3ST

‘R}§LV.§§Lfi ?1L£AfiE

“‘u_ Hlkflfififihfififi 332;:

$HI°I’RA§URGé§ ‘l”?sLfi°K*-$’?? $31 .

SU

‘E939 HAGQRAIREPA
PsQRIC§3}3T’5EI3T

Kffis V. Ffififi Vilsiafifi
mammawmux EQBLZ
$H$’1’R.%’Q’E£$~A T?sX.eUE{ W53’? $31.

‘€0.31 W mmmmm nmwz awwwma W Mmmmm MWM zzmm M im&&%£M}%}1WM%@Ma

3 rmzsm swarm:

gm m 9A

’33 yams, AGRIf3§I:TETRIST

RXA v.mmza wmasa

HIREGGNTAEUR mam
CHITRAEUEGA TALEEK – 5’27 5o1,.~~~–

4 mwmazam
we E-£23.LLII<AR.3'E3'I~£F§ ,
as mans, kGRICUI;'€m'_£IST'A.V_ "
RKA 1;. PALYA VILLfi:E§E"~~
xxaxesmmaa HoaL:'=.. _
t'.2KITRADUR.G–35. ,.-gzgzuxi-~-~§'f:-w M1,. '

.. RES?GNEEKTS

my 39.: : Qééziasfiaivégxfiiu, ADV. Ewe.
3333' .3 Kg' 32%;:-;:$c3¢1::.1*V3;3;':« ma K1 T0 R4;

mm 'z1sza…:s_s' E:.:.u~c Wes' we 92* cm AGAIRST 32$
Jtrnrssxssmfafz' i}E£;1i§EE.._1}.iriI'E7;13 17.01.2933 PASSED 3:
aA.r;::…..322'.?_90;=:::;;. $2523 93* Tim I A.rmI..c:v::.
Jzznw <sfz'¢~.v;::.2~;.'3_ cazafmmzrasa, anmamm mm APPEAL
mm "sE*::'rINs»*3.=;smE; mmsmm AN}? 23:33.23 mxrgxca

23.a2′..«2$r:a;§’yaggm-.___:1>:”‘0s.m.55i2m1 ms: mm FILE
as’ TEE”1?i;?;};..,GIVI£.«_ €JB..D}’«2′..} ca-mzawzrma.

22:2.-ifgfi $433; ma mg. nzcrnwma J8

I-T ‘:*a::£sV ‘m.;’2;L”L’.*r:4§:’_ cmmtr DELIVEREE TIE zmmsems:

Jfisangzsrzfi

v*.Afieféfi§ant5: 1 & 2 in @§S. Né.5§f2$§1 an tfis

the Prizizcigal fiivil zfudge :Jz:.nn.,3,

‘ “C§;:%afiurga, have filed this aaaand aypéal

:’m ~fifieatiQning légaiity anfi sfizrestneaa af the

‘ judgmant anfi dearea data§ §?.Q?g2G§8 gaaagfi by

the I Afidi. flivil fihdg {$3.33.}, Chitsfiafiga,

1

Wfiwkfl mmw.m v…nom…umu 1… M-..

W WWW.” Wm awmwmamwwa mam ¢£w€.%§§%”E’ QZZW7 fi»%%M&”¥’&%% W¥$W fiflflim” 0%’ Kfiflfiflfiflififlc W@§”i 4

Thay aisa contgndaa that tha auit far relief af

declaraticn is bazred.by’iaw af lim;§é§i§n;nV

4′
parties,

iaaueg:

{1}

0n the basis cf the_§£a$¢$fifia_¢£’$§§

the $2131 Cant; £x§m€§{ thé* fi¢£;#wifig–

Whethar_ ths”: pia;ntiff$A~ prave the
axiste3c§ ‘§:gg éfii: ¢art track tram ¥.

Falya ta $hfl$m$:fifififi£§ as allegefi?

5*flhg§hé; -th§x_pi§£n:iff5 further pravs
“t§a%¢_def$fifi&n§§, have illagally and

fi:§Q§§@r§$$§3y;blockad suit fiart track

:.with §a&b§fi wixe fanning at AB sad CE

.§Qin$?7_:2F

“fihethez the defeuéanta grove thfi

v;” ¢#i§tanae at fiXYZ afi Mfififig aart Exact
” –“.’j;b7gi1vg; mm by yiaizztififa?

Addi.

Far what zeiiafs §laintiffis axe
antitlsé far

issue §¢.{1} fihether tha auit af the

piaintiff is barzed by iaw Qf limitaticn?

f<//

:t'nlusI"h arnwmias wwwma WW' lfW%.E°W'¥a?"%fi.fi"'lRJ"Q_ Mamfl fiwfijwflg Q

18

villags and alga abaut the ahfitruazticgnsis cauaea
ky ‘aha ciefendanta for 2.133;: cf the”jV:k::a§Lf..:.§§’~~.trask

rzzzzning in survey £€::::..2′?{i and

View af tha matter, th$.:”L£:.~wer–“4′ 3:-IA:>1i3c’;::’

allawed tha appeal wag .13set’ A.’ é.;si8.’a., ” tube; ”

and decree af the rA:i’i:a1_1r%;.VVAV»::*,:1:j.é§;£ii’3s”j3′.ngEh;
suit 3.21:3. demtezjefid a;s–.. .-ggpirayefi for
directing the ‘fig ramave the
abat:z:ucti§zf:§ AB and CB

and no;-‘ .tc.j,…’;’._¢1’aL13;_:’.s.§é’ Va§:3,¥ ghstruatisna ta the

p}.ai31?.:i.:fif::=g_V’.’i:i*;:j:.. izhézjt ‘a:;_$:w5: ‘—inf» the caxtwtrack . Being

aggriavmiiby ‘tfxgfifaicl.V j–::;§§g:j:zént am dsstzrae at” the
iowez Ap§é3«._3:Mat:e ._ 4V’2I}vo7=z:;:i~’?::, the appeliant -~

have I’ f:i.~’a:*a;5j_ Qrataé this app ea}. .

mam 3:: s. Hadhtzkar Nafiig,

<:§uzs. :x§§'=;=i aggseaxing far the aggsailant ma

'= f§;'e;€'£.»3;$fi ti*s.a':'r$<zara5 at the ceurta hsiaw.

Rftax: hearing the iaarned mrzunsei far

tizéyégpaallanfit, I am af the epinisn that thia

' a§peal aces rm: invaiva in any qnastian at law

mmnmcmm. W

2 sgtmm" W mmmmm MW éé:%.iW"f OF mwmfim mm-E

–WVWW W-ww’mm W!”

I?

by tha plaintiffs. ‘3E’h$ juagmant cf.-“‘z’:he Lsswer
Appellate Ceurt as mat suff§; fi$§fi A any

illagality ax irregularity’.

interfercenaze by E1113 Coj3ift”.w A. %a;«;p¢;¢:%%%

lacka merit and ia ‘~
Hence, thé appeal is’ ::I%,_i:’§;’=:=m:i.5$.ed..’ ‘ V

31*

VWWEHMMQIW J05 nun:–n –W