IN THE HIGH CSURT 2:35 KARNATAKA AT BANaALg”2:gfa..’_:’T»..%
Dated: Tfxis i:}i1€ 431 day of December ‘ ‘
BEFORE
‘THE HQEWBLE MR.Jus’r1(:E ;’§’;A§}f:if;figN’~NAfF£i}§;:¥§_
REGHLAR SECOND AP;>;;EAL’Ng§’:g091/i3{§e5;’ ”
BETWEEN :
H M HIRIMNNAPPA S’,*G._§éfE&N.j:%FPA£AH
AGES ABQUT56 YEA:~f;sf_ jy
occ::aG9§:’c:;L3*u*R1s:§: –
R 1 0. HE€C}{‘}égi3EjKz”£V:*2BI L’1;z’%.{}.i?,-
SR:N_G::-H31 .
CH1CKM;A(ErAL¥3R D1STE:3′?.’? 1:-sE:L1.ANT
(By Sp-.v:s;»;{:s:;: W»
AND: V l ‘ ”
_H S N;v’¥.R}%YAHA ~:3Hrs;’r”I’A S/<3 SASHA BHATTA
..i azimafi ..
‘ C§Cc;..%.AGR1cU-L–‘rURis’r
R;’§}._HEGGADE, KAVAD£V’1LLAGE
‘ _SRIfJ{}ER<i.TLAUK_
Ac-H1–r:;x0k’T’»:{mi§’;
the Stand that Yhfi dtzfendarjzt has not done A’
by way cf eit;1″.1e:’ pzlttiag up 3. ierlca or o’rJ:3tr1_ 1_:ctir1g:’tl3.<t
alleged pathway and. I}1Q1'6€Z)V€iI', Ij:11<5::.;:1§3§f€£i1c1é_1f1t:–_ $5.. i_
Claiiiziiitg any righi aver th€:.a}3§gedV";Q:_3;?:hWa§7»;
is in existancéz. 1:1 QFGSI' to harass. £116 dfieiidatgt, 1:113
piamtifi has figea :~ne's:i§~:.
4. The §t;%%§§.;Ei:V1′::oti::”t i.3s¥.1«:’:s and
aftm’ appr»%i%1:i§g “%:ig.fi;;11’t:}f;:;§§: §§;1~.–£*€£:01″:;i, $1.11′: of thfi
plaintiff rastxairziizg the
defandgarfi ‘frétrzLV§¥’:i§;1S,i11§’A”:§1struCtion i:1 respect of the
8’L1itAV.!3Ch6C4i4?Li]§§ m=%ad “.of:8 feet width shovim in Eha
.–.,.,..Qm§1{i11isA$ic3Q€:r Hziié;}j’VEx.D24. On appsaj by the
5i;r:f£’:§;i1:ii§:1iV,;’ iower appeliata 3011?? found that the
pie;;i_£1t3f§ ta Establish any right. 0:’ way GVEI’
t33Tc% flegéd pathway and ti’1e:ref0:re suit crf the piaintiff
-rg%:a§. éisn1i3ssd by aflswing the def€:§1daI:t’s appczta}.
S. “Fh<::ugh Eearzlcd cmunsei far the appéilarit
referred is that C38mmissi0r1e1"s sketch map and
cantezidsd that the triai ceurt was justifitiéi in
}
',0
graxztiizg the rfiiifif 311:1 the irswer appeilatcz (:(}L1;1"'E
coninzittaéi arror in satting aside the jucigment gfzf T151316;
M13 'as:
trial court, submissien made by the I€8I’}.’1€{.3; :__C£:$i1.?i’$€:i .
ii}? the r:=:spGn.de:nt is that there i’s_ 13v:»>_ Sp€:_i:if1C* ;55_E:if:éL:§.§:’1g
by the plaiiitiff with regard ts :the;’_€xistfe»f}Ce:”ef”‘if
pathway or any sase:ne:1ta;’£yj:V’;rfight–‘béigiag
the piaizltifi” aver {ha jgéfiod g1f f:’j1:1e”sg) $5;
their right intm a right ‘moreaver, the:
dfiffilidaflt v;:_10t. or
0¥;~s:3:*1V1<:1:i03;i' as 'the
the alleged £3a'£'11wa§f.
6.” the abovfi suhmissicsrxs
n1a:i¢:’Vai:1d Qii =ggi3:1g_ through the judgments sf the
» $921213, Wei} as the pleading 9f the parties, i
37§:’id»ti1é:;’é–tij1éA’g:jVi3;i:1t§ff has not Came out witkx a defgnita
‘marl righiziy htiid by the appciiatfi com”:
‘A ~ fa:i<;£.._sé$ondiy that vary evidence piaced an behakf csf
i]h6'Apiaimiif£' aim indicated that the piaéirfgiff ha}; giver:
R up uging the ailagetii pat.hv;?ay and has started making
use cf anathm' pathtvagg. Th{*:1'€tfGI'f: {his avidence sf
1
, 4
\
S
{hrs p1a3m:iff’$ Wi'(I’I€’:SS PV’«.?–2 was taker; 119126: Gf and the
iowér appeilate ceurt halci that the piaizztiif had faiihheti
to establish existence cf any” pathway and ars.
plaintiff had faiied :0 €s:tab1i$}1 his right__A–zi¥:x’;i*.é§:Ar:’ .
Siihfidlfle pathway, the 10’L’i»’€1″ _a.ppc::11a_i锑 cg’;
appmciatioxl cf the entirs evidé1″;ce’§_’_’0Ii récérri, ‘iléid 7-:
that the piaintjfl’ had faiieti .§éi3~v..§:stai¥31i=$I1 <3:é§S€VV»f(31'
grant of permarzelfi i17_j.unctivA<)1:-."v"£'1"m_ said "9'it?:W.. tak€n
by the kjwm' appe1_1at6;{jQ:j:'£. fifiniing an facts
anazi the said.' '_-fo£1r_;d to bat: either
}3f3"I"V€iI:"S€ _0I'A 'V1i}'?lf(%8,S{}I1i5*L3.}};{:, {I see 110 substantial
questiaii sf imsf 'iauéiififlg mglxged in this appeal.
the a§3("f)V'€i"S3id reagens, tile appeal stands
Sd/as
Judge