High Court Karnataka High Court

Chinnamma vs Bda on 13 October, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Chinnamma vs Bda on 13 October, 2008
Author: N.Ananda


EN THE HIGH comm 01:’ KARNATAKA AT BAN’c3;é;L:>’;§%:__j: .

DATED THIS THE 23TH my 01? OCTGBEE2 2503 V %

BEFORE

THE I-¥C)N’BLE MR. qu$’rrcE”N’§ANAN:)E;*’V. 1.

M.F’.A.NC>.399’7 oFfQoo%4 fCL’P(:.}’V’:

BETWEEN:

1 CHINNAMMA .

Witt} SHAMANN ”

50 YEARS, Z.

Rffl §<0:31iHA1;Li3~'§1,L;a.<3§: V V
VARTHIJR i~EOI:3v-E;§I'_JEi3'¢§§'A.i'~?'~. _ ' "
BHtMA'z*{A<;§A}:% PC)E'="£',._ ..
HA L :1, jSTA.§}E,"£3:ANC3<éLQRE ' .. ,

Ix}

MARIAWAV _' ' % _ ' –

42 ?_r2s,_sm.sHAL;~giAré1§z2a…4

R/O :;.::_3z3rHA:;:..: VELLAG-E

VARTHUR HOBL1 di$;EW’;N Emma NAGAR
Res? HAL :1. S’TAC%E ‘
,.§:;;=aNc;,JxLoRE” . ….. <4 .

4: '$83, ?%HAM§%NNA
. -9:2,:ax-v;<'<:2::1;.~m:;:,Iv;:,1,A KGDEHALIJ ViLL$’sGE ..

VARTHUQ HOBLE JEEVAN BH:MA«:m”CAR
POST HAL 1: S’§’AGE ‘ – ‘
BANGALORE

S VENKPKESH

:28 ‘ms, Sjf) saammzgm _
re/ca KODIHALLI VIL1;A.i,}E «_

VARTHUR HOBLE JEEVAN 3-,v-,1.;gm’zr~. ;i~1;é;€:€«,;R”

POST HAL II STAGE’; _
aANGA1,0_R.E:_A I

suggamg-;~.’ X . ”

:26 YRS; D/»O’SHA?fiAN’N;9.. r

9,10 1<.:H;::r;:;_,: v::.._;;;p.<_31~,: "
vAVR'T'§ia[§=§T.;aI0BI;i"Jr:Ery'AN BHIMA NAGAK
P<:'=_sT _HAL'i:.'vSTA'GE'«.._ « '
BAN_Gf~.LC}'§?E_i ' *

s<3o15;g.Lg _ _
:24.,YRS, S/Q E'§HAMz&.NNPs

,, 4:2/nKoD1HA£,LI VELLAGE
v._v:x.§_:fr;1»~:L:§’2 HGE3LE”J’£*Z1EVAN Bi-{EMA NAGAR’

‘ms’? I{AI~,.__1I STAGE

‘ ” –Bga»I.,§§AI;0E’E.

m~

“KUQ£§g f

-,3: ‘mas, $10 MUNI KU?PA

F3} K013] FEALLI “VILLAGE
VAR’I i{UR’ HQBLI JEEVAN BI-HMA N£’~’*.C’zAR

—- A. ,_?s? HALE} STAGE
” _ BANGALORE

‘ }$KKAYAMM&

Méulflfi’ W/O LATE THAYAPPA

R/’O KODIHALLE VILLAGE

VARTHUR HCJEBLI JEEVAN Bfiifidfia NAGAR
POST HAL Ii STAGE}

APPELLANTS E AND 3 ‘§'{“} ii ‘
REPRESENTED BY ?’i§WEF1a1I11i:.ifi’5 had filed an _
for gra1″1t of temp0:’arjs: i11j1_11”:<:ti<)1': u
{H2111 i:T1t.erfe:'i:1g wit}: 1)os$ess%Q11
131'01%3€1"i.§:. The tiizfi azourt }:1::§:s..__§;iis;41Vii$:s"e<iV :1?
the sclzrzciuké 'to the 'a[3piiC¢:i;t:4ii(i1V1::,_' .§;_§:o}::'?é: been
<£e$c2'ibe€1 as failewsz V '

«fili that pies: ar;c,i.1.g;gf¢e§ bearing
No. 223/: __'4*L4»?$.f,A-.*:',f'I:.';'orV)L :"'l'V§'9b£z:', Bangalare
South. i§;"q£::._I<:;' 3 oanstmcted fhereon

Zaearizig smssk Kméizgg} Tgfi;a$.k154;zA, 154/123, 156/1,

25%;? 253/3;» Q15?/%m, 157/5, 158/IA, 357/'1c:_

:5g,z];5 g;:;djf;A5o being situated an either side af ska}

II Stage, Eangalere rneasuring about

-28 bounded as foliows:

” ‘ by : Gu.tt’ahalliAbZ2iaha’s praperfy
West 333;,’ Abraiaimppa praperty
North by: Addigappws property

Sent}: by: 1 V531 ‘A’ Main Ejéfld Kakaiappwg property

_ (T4. fix

2. As cmiid be $6611 from the pia.:2.,°$ .4
{i(}C”L1I11€i1’it fiiad by the parties, iand H
in an extent at’ 34 g”u1:f:;:»3.:s; sit2_1:;f:<i*~at4 '4:%§i£§ge
belorxgeef to fiusbazafi 0f 15%

fI11pI"()VE*I11fi'-Pit 'I'rust Boaafi –{1:i'c:aw EDA)' –a<:'_"qLzi;fed"' 34

games 01' land in the said "1m::11:<é1*"*ai~:i'é final
Notification dated }9,8."19_tfy-'«§§L.,.3§£'§1e_:a;zaf:;2r€i*»__was passed

on 19. 1.1976 miaiw' cf faken over by

CITE. At t;h't:'"' i11:E§§:£§V§}b€:-:_ O__f '*~E1_1.i.¥ ;ba12d' of W p1a1'::'1tiff –
;5i,.S1}8lI13§lI1Ei_ :i'é:.fé1'é:-35.6 was 1:1.é16:ivc"":'"1111de:1* Section 18 of
the Act. ' '

3. Thét’-plainfiffs’~.%_i3;é:filed O.S.N0.5128/’ 1996 for

,- v€§_€C13VI’é:i:CiQ§Ei of titié 911-ri’ permanent inj umrtion agaizasé:

iéiiere not able to get an intarixza older.

V Therr:fe5i”e, s1.£ii;_ was ¥ViIhdI’Z:1WI1 and the present suit is

filfid $1.. V’§’:1§:{:Vla;’a.tic>:1 of titie: and passession 0f ‘B’

séiledififz pI”0p€:1’ty and p€:I’II1aI1€’f£’11Z i£}j¥.1I1Cfi()I”1 in res1::e(:t

sailed L133 p1’o;:ve1’ty.

4. it is the ease of plagizatiffs that; r:oi.Wit.I1s£a:1di11g

V the &CQ?_1iSif§{}I1 of hand may CQ11t’,im1€ to be in

3\; \. c.~.rA”\x»..-I”/aw Wffizx.

plamtiffs are entireiy difierent. In none of “me

bOL1I1CL’:1{‘i€S, I’f:i1{I}8il13.I1g 6 guntas of land is * 3

adjacr;-mt p:’e»pe1*t.y. The piaintifis have co:3té:3;§lc¢1.’V.i§f1$E _ V’

HAL Sanitary Board has given S
t0 the property in their p0ss>tzs;si<);;1i':§'1"c1A." 'V
in physical possession 0f 'in
(iiS§J111Z€, that éct bf __ di£f6r..r.§i1t. peftiens of Sy’.No.223 are

. §6E8g¥’ét§1i~{” :u_adeAAi:1v:!::..c<na111es sf p1ai11t:'effs. It is not the

*.,<:a::sé" -:a.f_ that they are in possession of diiferant

poffijhs éif ficlmdule propelty. On the other hand,

_ 7:; is their" case that they are in joint possessing of 61'}.iZiI'E3:

;"s{iE';¢du}.e propemx. The botmclaries of 'A' scheciule

…_ "p1'€§p@I*ty and 'B' schedule pmperty are i11(:or1sist@11t. E

N' 9/Law

6. The plaintiffs had filed 0.8. No.5123/1996V.e1>1d
the suit was witliedrawll. The p1aé11t:ifi”s have ; V.
this fact. A ‘

‘7. ‘”i’he learned trial giudge 0::

above facts has heid that £0 ”

cut prima faeie case. ?’he held
that plaintiffs are gui1fy**»faets.

8. 0:1 re~ce;1eiderafitfi’1::Qf I find
that ‘ hl1Sba;11{1i”‘ .1’§t’~ :;._v ” ;5;§11a:nazma. had
received, 01″ 34 guntas of
land ‘_’p1ei11tiITs have not fiver:

eorrect ¥:10i”1i?:,_c1a1’iee._0A§_’A.{_”..’a11d ‘B’ schedule properties.

, The he1§e.;1Qt.vestab1is}}ed auillerity cf the HAL

..1_:o assign. khata mzmbers to difierent

p01*fi€::1s which was admittedly acquired by

é .. x;p1air1tifi’s have not explained as to how

‘v.kfhAei:Lé’–..ewas separately made out in the names of

\\11«.f§,;¢d§,r1t.ifTS when it is their case that they are in joint

‘fpossessio11 of the plaint ‘A’ seileduie. In these

eirczunstaxxces, it is 11:31: pessible to hold that the

W 2 ~

impugned order i$ p€:I’ve1’se 01′ capricious. gfiftezf _

tlzrmzgh the ciecisianfi cited by §:a:a{11i2f,3c;lL_ u ‘V

appeaxitig for jalaintiffs, I find th;§.t

ia aforestated éecisi<::s:ns is 1"1€;t"ap13I"' able Ec».'i:'£':;:;vfg(:tsl of
Uilfi? present case.

11′: the 11>,-suit, a_p;3§§é1¥ is–‘_aiis;m’is~st3d;’~% _