{"id":230112,"date":"2008-09-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008"},"modified":"2017-11-18T20:59:00","modified_gmt":"2017-11-18T15:29:00","slug":"sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Sri Muniswamappa vs M S Manjunath on 11 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri Muniswamappa vs M S Manjunath on 11 September, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: V.Jagannathan<\/div>\n
SMT. NARASAMMA\n\nW] O MUNINARAYANA\n\n40 YEARS\n\nD10 VENKATASWAMAPPA\n\nR\/A NADAGOWDANA\n\nGOLLAHALLI VILLAGE\n\nBIDARAHALLI HOBLI\n\nBANGALORE SOUTH TALUK 562 149.\n\nSUBBAIAH P A\n\nS\/O APPUCHA\n38 YEARS _  -\nRIAT LINGARAJAPURAVM \" \u00a2 V\nBANGALGRE CI'?Y.T5_\u00a2\u00a7G. 069\n\n{BY SR1. K.V.MANJUNA'i'I\u00a7, :AD\\F'I?Qf'\u00e9.'Rv~?i(:i)\".to R-4(a)\nSR1. A. BALAKR1_s;;-man, Acrv F.ORj_R:_1_)_f'\n\nIN R.s.A.ri5. \n\n1\n\n M\n S] 0% SR1--;A,s'HAi.4AN_NA _'\n\n'AGED 'ABOUT 45' 'SEARS\nRm; CHKKKAAGUBBI' 'VILLAGE\nBIDARr1.HALLI*.HOBLI\n\n' ~ BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK 562 149.\n\n ms; .nAN15Ai{UMAR\n ..Sj.G\u00abAL'vSHAMANNA\n- YEARS\n\nRfA~.._  GUBBI VILLAGE\nBI.D\ufb01\u00a7?AHALLi HOBLI\n\n BAFIGALORE soum TALUK 552 149.\n\n:19\n\n'33; MUMYAPPA\n\n AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS\n\nS] O ERAYELLAPPA\n\nR I AT. NADAGOWDANA GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE\nBIDARAHALLI HOBLI\n\nBANGALORE SOUTH TALUK 562 149.\n\nSR! RAJANNA S] O ERAYELLAPI\"-'A\nAGED ABGUT ~45 YEARS\n\n\n\nR ~  4, A i\u00a5v*- R.s;g;_,NQ,  \u00e9\n\n   1;. %' * .Rj:s:;s.4'%'1cA\u00a7iDAKUMAR\n\n 2  SR1 MUNIYAPPA\n\n6 Sm. THIMMAKKA\n\n55 YEARS\n\nW\/O MUNISWAMAPPA\n\n1:)\/o VENKATASWAMAPPA\n\nR\/AT MADEKODUGENAHALLI  M\n\nBAGALUR POST, JALA Roma'  :\n\nDEVANAHALLI TALUK   '     \nBANGALORE RURAL 13Is1'R;:CI'=._S62 119.\"  R ~ \n\n7. SMT. NARASAMMA  \nw\/0 MUNINARAYANA  \n40 YEARS _   \n9\/0 VENKATASWAMAPPA U V \nR\/A NADAGow1)ANA'=.L   \"\nGOLLAHALLI WLLAGE \nBIDARAHALLI M-131.1}   . ., \nBANGAL'QR'E S\u00a3Z_)U'1_'H..'PALU'K_\"5tS2V149.\n8. SUE3B\ufb01;jAH\"'P~..A\u00bb _  \"\nS\/0--vAPP'J_CHA  \n R\/AT Ll.HGAE~2AJ.._ \"IJRAIL!\n\"gBANGALOR'E C;1TY--__56p O69.\n\n(SR1. A. xBA1;aKR1sH':s:A;\\1%;'R'ADv FOR C\/R-1 AND R-2\nsR;.- :<._v. M&P{J'U1'ifATH, ADV FOR R-5(a) to 5(a)\n\nS;  ..A'.;= SHAMANNA\n42 _YEARS\n"R\/A. CHIKKA GUBBI VILLAGE\n" _R'R:mRAHALL: HOBLI\nBANGALORE scum TALUK 552 149.\n\nAGED ABOUT 50 YEARS\n\nS] O ERAYELLAPPA\n\nR[AT. NADAGOWDANA GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE\nBIDARAHALLI HOBLE\n\nBANGALORE SOUTH TALUK 562 149.\n\n\n\nYELAHANKA HQBLI\nBANGALORE DISTRICT.\n\nSRi VENKATASWAMAPPA\nSINCE DEAD BY HIS L.Rs\n\nSMT. THIMMAKKA\n65 YEARS\n\nW1 0 MUNISWAMAPPA .\nD\/D VENKATASWAMAPPA\nR\/AT MADEKODUGENAHALL1' - V.\nBAGALUI-1' POST, JALA HOBLI\nDEVANAHALLI TALUK \n\nBANGALORE RU~E\u00a7AL I5'i'S*ri\u00a7ig,VVV""5_62 1'1<')"; \n\nSMT. NARASAMMA; '\nW10 MUNINARAYANA\n40 YEARS   I    \nD\/QHVENELATAA, WAMAPFA. " \nR\/x;'N'M)As;:qwDANA.V  '- ' '\nG0L.1,A\u00a311gLL1 v11.,L:~..;CrE' \n\n ~atDiARjAHALL.1 'H{}BLI ' \n BANGALQ_REV%sQu:r\ufb01 TALUK 562 149.\n\n~suBBmp.i9I  A  \n\nS\/'O.4AP,PUCH'A_ " \n\n-- . 33 YEARS\u00bb \n\nR',iAT Lir\u00e9-GARAJAPURAM\n\n i.r;2A1mALoRF.'."C1TY 550 059.\n\n   {Sm :I{a};?. 4ivL4$15\u00a7,JUNA'i'H, ADV FOR R-4(a) to 4(e))\n\n' I2;' R.s%.a.'\u00a7ifc.;'.J::13s3;2006\n\n 1.<\/pre>\n
” _ ms. NANDAKUMAR
\n‘3\/0 A. Si-IAMANNA<\/p>\n
42 YEARS<\/p>\n
R\/A. CHIKKA GUBBI VILLAGE
\nBIDARAHALLI HOBLI<\/p>\n
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK 562 149.<\/p>\n
SRI MUNIYAPPA
\nAGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
\nS] O ERAYELLAPPA<\/p>\n
  ~ “(Sm AV.’ BALAKRISHNAN, ADV FOR 0\/ R-1)<\/p>\n
R\/AT. NADAGOWDANA GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE
\nBIDARAHALLI HOBLI
\nBANGALORE SOUTH TALUK 562 149.<\/p>\n
3 SR] RMANNA s\/0 ERAYELLAPPA   .
\nAGED ABOUT 45 YEARS   _
\nRESIDING AT NADAGOWDANA GGLLAI_L%__LLI”     ‘ .<\/p>\n
VILLAGE, B1DARAHALL1Hi;\u00a7BLr;%AAT..Ti’ 4′ _ . ~
\nBANGALORE scum 1fALUr<ss;:_:_149.  -. \u00ab.<\/p>\n
(SR1. A. BALAKRISHNAN, ADv._}\u00ab'QR cm.-:)–.,    <\/p>\n
IN R.s.A.N0.1355I2GQ6':%\u00ab– <\/p>\n
1. M.S.NANDAKUMAR”  V<\/p>\n
3\/0 A. SHAMANNA
\n42 YE\u00a3iR\u20ac~;’i;;_-‘  i ‘V _
\nR] A..~{::i~:_rI{.\u00a7<A Gu;3B:…V11;LAGE.
\nBID.5.RAH,ALLi– 1-1031.1'
\n_B%A1~;C;A_L0:~i:E,,saU'IfH 'l"1'%..L11}{ 562 149.<\/p>\n
2 ESR-I MUNV\u00a7'rAP:?A"A\u00bb__ ._ '
\nAGED ABVoUj'~'.s@.__ YEARS
\nS10 ERAYELLAPPA.\n<\/p>\n
_ _ RJAT: NAm;G{:wEiANA GDLLAHALLI VILLAGE
\n_ ‘ BIDARAHALLI 1~3!.oBL1
\n ;BANGALORE—SOUTH TALUK 562 149.<\/p>\n
‘  _ “s\u00a7?I:,RA::JANNA s\/0 ERAYELLAPPA
\n . “AGE_DV3\u00a7B’OUT 45 YEARS
\nRESIBING AT NADAGOWDANA GOLLAHALLI<\/p>\n
 VILLAGE, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI
\n.. B.{&NGALORE SOUTH TALUK 562 149.<\/p>\n
 RESPONBENTS<\/p>\n
THESE R.S.As ARE FILED U\/S 100 OF CFC
\nAGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DEGREE
\nD’!’.0′?.{}4.2006 PASSED IN R.A.NOs.296]2003,<\/p>\n
re
\nO.S.No.114\/95 was set aside and ().S.Nos.231\/96<\/p>\n
and 232 \/ 96 were decreed.\n<\/p>\n
2. The facts in a nutshell are to the e\ufb01’ee’t–eu<\/p>\n
the appexlant herein filed the suit  <\/p>\n
seeking the relief of deciara\ufb01on\u00ab.  <\/p>\n
injunction against the defendants   of 1 <\/p>\n
4 guntas of land in sy.kNe{4s\/2  of.. %  o %<\/p>\n
Goilahaili village, B\u00e9dayahal\ufb01  South
\nTaluk and the said   claim of the
\nappellant  ‘_’he   property by
\nadverse   pendeney of the said
\nSL1it,:     2 therein \ufb01led
\n  of 5 acres 28 guntas of<\/p>\n
la11.– in   the aforesaid 1 acre 4<\/p>\n
   of  they in turn sought permanent<\/p>\n
    the appellant herein from<\/p>\n
  their peaceful possession and<\/p>\n
 enjofymtent of the aforementioned land measuring 5<\/p>\n
” \u00bb_’ac::I\u00a79:s 23 guntas. The 1st defendant in O.S.No.33G\/93<\/p>\n
 =  \ufb01led the suit O.S.No.232\/96 in resmct of 18<\/span><\/p>\n
%<\/p>\n
‘,1<\/p>\n
ll
\nguntas of land in Sy.No.48\/ 1 and the 2nd defendant<\/p>\n
\ufb01led O.S.No.231\/96 in respect of 26 guntas of  in<\/p>\n
the aforementioned Sy.No.4~8\/ 1 and they also<\/p>\n
for declara\ufb01on and for delivery of possessio\ufb01   <\/p>\n
3. The appellant herein   ‘ <\/p>\n
piaint averment that the sl\ufb01t    <\/p>\n
belonged to one   the eppellant
\nand the defeodapts   family, and
\nthe  of Sy.No.47, the
\n  and enjoyment of
\nthe  ‘overt 30 years and it is also
\noonte:a d’e\u00a7#A\u00ab.de.fengiant and in turn sold the same to 731<\/p>\n
 eeciefand\u00e9sxt.  both these defendants were aware of<\/p>\n
tee a  being in possession of the suit<\/p>\n
 .. ]p1’opeft;ies as his possession was never disturbed at<\/p>\n
 point of time. It was also contended by the<\/p>\n
x   “appellant that the 7222 defendant also sold major<\/p>\n
portion of Sy.No.48 in favour of the defendants I and<\/p>\n
.%<\/p>\n
:4
\ndefendants 1 to 3 therein were directed to hand over<\/p>\n
the possession of the suit preperty to the <\/p>\n
The prayer for mesne pro\ufb01ts was rejected.<\/p>\n
6. The aggrieved party appealed   <\/p>\n
appellate court and as  <\/p>\n
lower appellate    entire
\nmaterial on   ‘4 Eextezference was
\ncalled in respecpof  by the trial
\ncourt,   court’s refusal
\nt0 81″  appeliate eourt held
\nthatdvlthe’  have passed a decree in<\/p>\n
the s11itxf1}edvb3dzde\u00a3Tei1de.nts 1 and 2 in O.S.No.330\/93<\/p>\n
 =   eei1eeque\ufb01’e’.3r…t\u00a71e lower appellate court dismissed<\/p>\n
  \ufb01ne 296\/03 and 297\/03, but however,<\/p>\n
 mm by the defendants 1 and 2<\/p>\n
 mentiened above R.A.Nos.20\/04, 21\/04 and 22\/04<\/p>\n
“id-V  allowed by setting aside the judgment and<\/p>\n
d    “decree of the trial court in 0.S.No.1l4\/95 and the<\/p>\n
suit was decreed as prayed for and an enquiry into<\/p>\n
the mesne pro\ufb01ts was also ordered. The Court also
\nb<\/p>\n
‘.1<\/p>\n
evidence of defendants witnesses, it was submitted<\/p>\n
that even a suggestion was put on behalf” <\/p>\n
appellant to the witnesses for the   _  <\/p>\n
the defendants are still ready;   <\/p>\n
amount as per the ageement Exi}32,   <\/p>\n
receive the balance    sale
\ndeeds in favour ofjilfie   of the
\neneroaehed   to this aspect
\nof the egiseiice,  is  when the
\nappellant of the appellant
\n  possession will not
\n   that it was for the first<\/p>\n
tinge” in the ., ‘V1990, when the defendants got<\/p>\n
 “their land in Sy.No.48\/ 1 and found that<\/p>\n
  eixcrroached 1 acre 4 guntas of land<\/p>\n
iI”i””Sy;No’; 1, that the appellant herein started to<\/p>\n
V.   *ai1ege\u00b0’ that his possession is by way of adverse<\/p>\n
“‘-naossession and therefore if the period is reckoned<\/p>\n
‘ it “from the said year of 1990, the suit \ufb01led by the<\/p>\n
piaixitiif falls short of 12 years which is the statutory
\nperiod required to succeed in taking the plea of<\/p>\n
3\/,<\/p>\n
19<\/span>
\nadverse possession. Therefore, referring to all these<\/p>\n
aspects of the material on record, it is submitted that<\/p>\n
the lower appellate court has properly considere~\u00e9ij'<:iieA4<\/p>\n
entire materiai on record and its  V   '<\/p>\n
termed as either perverse or: "'tz.'1reasons\u00a7b1e',   V<\/p>\n
other submission made by the   <\/p>\n
respondents is that the  ':'ExtP1
\nsaid to be a partitj.eIji deed"  ieefer afapenate
\ncourt has eonsidere\u00e9    in the light
\nof the facts,  ease and has
\nfound   document, in as
\nmueiiwas, be renumbered as
\n 1', tne year 1990 after survey<\/p>\n
 _theI'eI'o1_fe vthe iquiestion of Sy.No.48\/ 1 and 48\/2<\/p>\n
 '~  _  "existenee" 'at the time of the partition deed<\/p>\n
  Exu.'P.:1::,'\u00bb-..t1eeVs_v:'i.aot arise. This itself is sufficient to<\/p>\n
it document Ex.P1 and rightly the lower<\/p>\n
 AAappei~iate court has not accepted the said document<\/p>\n
 i~.._?as.evidenci11g partition between the appellant and his<\/p>\n
it  V\u00bb mibrothers. Therefore, referring to all the above<\/p>\n
aspects, learned eeunsei for the respondents<\/p>\n
it\/.7<\/p>\n
2:)
\nsubmitted that all thesaappeals lack merit and are<\/p>\n
liable to be dismissed as no question of law, much<\/p>\n
less, substantial question of law is involved: <\/p>\n
these appeals.\n<\/p>\n
10. In the light of the aforesaid <\/p>\n
fozward by the   I have
\ncarefully examined V   _ including the
\nplaint avern_ae:;t. herein in his
\nsuit and;    has referred to
\n  ‘inmdl\u00e9spute and these facts
\nthat  of the judgment of the
\nlower    as under:\n<\/p>\n
”  .>_’.’_:’I’l1e factswhieh are no longer in dispute
\n_  six appeals are: Sy.No.48 was
\n1 “iiieastlring 8 acres 28 guntas. It
\n‘belonged to Narayanappa; who sold it<\/p>\n
~  em defendant, who inturn sold it to 7m<\/p>\n
x ‘T  defendant. 1” defendant purchased 3<\/p>\n
acres under the 1’m\u00a7ste1\u00b0ed sale deed
\n(Ex.D3) from 7’31 defendant on 21.4.1988
\n(middle portion). 2nd defendant
\npurchased 2 acres 28 guntas (top portion)
\nunder the registered sale deed (Ex.D4)<\/p>\n
\ufb01r<\/p>\n
‘I<\/p>\n
25<\/span><\/p>\n
also found on evidence that it was only when the<\/p>\n
defendants found that there was eI1cI’oaehInent:’i:!y<\/p>\n
the plaintiff into their lands, when they  <\/p>\n
land in the year 1990, thatthe  dheifem ” ‘V<\/p>\n
thought of rushing to the  of <\/p>\n
suit and therefore   is <\/p>\n
reckoned, it still falls  of 12
\nyears to claim title”   possession.
\nThe said f1nding__ or  is based
\non the   be termed as a<\/p>\n
 In   aforesaid reasoning, in<\/p>\n
my _v_fiew,d eourt has not committed any<\/p>\n
  e3:f1″or,H’I’xiijeI1 less, can it be said that the<\/p>\n
  Lihe lower appellate court suffers from<\/p>\n
   in so far as plea of adverse<\/p>\n
 AA possession put forward by the appellant is<\/p>\n
at’-..v’eon*eemed. The learned Judge of the lower appellate<\/p>\n
  V. ocourt has considered the said plea from every<\/p>\n
conceivable angle and also in the light of the position<\/p>\n
..1<\/p>\n
26<\/span>
\nin law as has been enunciated by the Am); Court and<\/p>\n
therefore, I do not \ufb01nd much force in the submission<\/p>\n
made by the learned senior counsel for the A’<\/p>\n
that the judgment of the lower appe\ufb02atte   <\/p>\n
vitiated for non consideration Vef”‘ev\u00e9deI’j1Ce, .o’1’\u00a7 <\/p>\n
In fact, in my view, the lower    <\/p>\n
committed any error in V   been ‘V<\/p>\n
with regard to the” plea\/(if  eoseeseion is
\nconcerned. The deciei$c;~IiV  2000 KAR<\/p>\n
4134 referred’:toV1’by  eounsel for the<\/p>\n
 my not  to the case on
\nhand,’ *’If_h’is is  the appellant himelf
\nhas  in%ex}o\u00e9LA about the encmenment by<\/p>\n
. .  ”    the defendants.\n<\/p>\n
Foe above said reasons, I do not see any<\/p>\n
 A sub\u00e9ta\ufb01iai questioll of law being involved in anthem<\/p>\n
  and accordingly these appeals aredisnt\u00e9ssed.<\/p>\n
D _ Sd\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri Muniswamappa vs M S Manjunath on 11 September, 2008 Author: V.Jagannathan SMT. NARASAMMA W] O MUNINARAYANA 40 YEARS D10 VENKATASWAMAPPA R\/A NADAGOWDANA GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE BIDARAHALLI HOBLI BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK 562 149. SUBBAIAH P A S\/O APPUCHA 38 YEARS _ – RIAT LINGARAJAPURAVM ” \u00a2 V BANGALGRE CI’?Y.T5_\u00a2\u00a7G. 069 {BY SR1. K.V.MANJUNA’i’I\u00a7, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-230112","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri Muniswamappa vs M S Manjunath on 11 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri Muniswamappa vs M S Manjunath on 11 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-09-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-11-18T15:29:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri Muniswamappa vs M S Manjunath on 11 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-18T15:29:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1339,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Sri Muniswamappa vs M S Manjunath on 11 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-18T15:29:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri Muniswamappa vs M S Manjunath on 11 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sri Muniswamappa vs M S Manjunath on 11 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri Muniswamappa vs M S Manjunath on 11 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-11-18T15:29:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri Muniswamappa vs M S Manjunath on 11 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-18T15:29:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008"},"wordCount":1339,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008","name":"Sri Muniswamappa vs M S Manjunath on 11 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-18T15:29:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-muniswamappa-vs-m-s-manjunath-on-11-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri Muniswamappa vs M S Manjunath on 11 September, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/230112","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=230112"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/230112\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=230112"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=230112"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=230112"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}