IN THE HIGH COURT 0? KARNATAKQ fj
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAp "-.,:. 1%
DATED THIS THE 23TH 13AiYm(»V)¥*"J.AN1}AR$f_":2G{)9" '
BETFoRE'2__ . A
THE HOEWBLE MR.J ijj:S*r1cI§. B,.S;V..I5§i{x'I;ii§r
REGULAR SECQND "1~:;;g.s0i:i6';<300§8
BETWEEN; " '
Sri.Yellappa .
Age: Major,' C.'cc:AA;1j1:5usincs:é,
R / o Hatti};r.t3'1j; .SI:a1;§.fs.p __ V" -.._
Belgaum. ' . APPELLANT
(By "R. Gofilgg Ads: 5')"
'V " Amoiikchand Lengafle,
' figsag is-?Iajo1*,<._C}eg:: Agricuiture,
ii:/o." 2.13.3", Kare Galli,
' S}.1sa;b.apuf,L* --.Bc5lgaum,
Gaéag--.B»e_ggari. RESPONDENT
This RSA is filed under Section 106 of CPC, praying to
'S-§:_1:, j3zsid€: the judgment and decree passed in 0.8.94'?/99
Wdaied 12.11.2002 on the 53:: of the Court of the Additional
V' Civi} Judge (Junior Division), Eelgaum, and etc.
This appeal coming {:11 for adrtnission this day, the
Court passed. the following:
JUDGMENT
The suit filed by the plaintifi’-appellant
permanent injunction in respect :.:-‘f»f}1e’ ‘landed; ieanxe
to be decreed by the trial court. xx
that he was in actual physic.e§”possessielyef
The triai court further .§31ace锑1’e§snce_ 2 on that the
claim made by the deienden: of occupancy
rights c0ntend§.ng__ ‘in occupation of
the land been” rejeefiefiby the Tribune} and
the n;at£e;— a decision of this Court
passegén disposed of on 19.2.1088. The
iewer apnellatew c<_)1A11*.'t b_zis concurmd with these findings
hgf1<}ing 'r1;at Asi'ne:e:…={he czajm made by the defendant-
' seeking grant ef occupancy rights asserting that he
'ws's'in and enjoyment of the property as a tenant
beenenegafived and that the said decision has been
a V' .. Aniiémavtely upheid by the High Court, the defendant was not
ZA':entiiA}ed to assert that he was in possession of the lane}.
2. The eoncunent findings recorded by both the
courts are in the realm of appreciation of evidence, both era}
fie
ané documcn . This court in exercise of«~~*.i11*isCiiéf:ti£;11
under section 100 CPC cannot intezfext
ftndings.
Hence, ‘there being 1:415 “merit in this same V L’
dismissed.