Bangalore District Court
S. Manju vs Mr. V. Murthy on 26 August, 2021
1 O.S.No.25995/2017
Govt. Of Karnataka
C.R.P.67] TITLE SHEET FOR JUDGMENTS IN SUITS
Form No.9(Civil) AT MAYOHALL UNIT, (CCH-29) BANGALORE.
Title sheet for
Judgment in suits
(R.P.91)
Present: Sri. K.M. Rajashekar, B.Sc., LL.M.,
Dated: This the 26th day of August 2021
Original suit No. 25995/2017
Plaintiff:- S. Manju,
D/o Late A. Srinivasa Rao,
W/o M. Anand Kumar,
R/at No.1/1, Flat NO.101,
1st Floor, 10th Cross,
Thyagarajnagar,
N.R. Colony,
Bangalore-560 028.
(Party in Person)
V/s
Defendants:- 1. Mr. V. Murthy,
S/o Late Venkatesh,
R/at: No.208, 3rd Cross,
Bhovi Colony,
Ramamurthynagar,
Bangalore-560 016.
2. Mr. Venkatesh,
S/o Appaiah,
R/at No.158, Yerrayanapalya,
Behind Sri. Rama Temple,
Ramamurthynagar,
Bangalore-560 016.
(Sri. A. Jacob Adv., for D.1 & 2)
2 O.S.No.25995/2017
Date of Institution of the suit 30.8.2017
Nature of the (Suit or pro-note, suit for
declaration and possession, suit for Injunction suit
injunction, etc.)
Date of the commencement of 11.6.2019
recording of the Evidence
Date on which the Judgment was 26.8.2021
pronounced
Year/s Month/s Days
Total duration 03 11 26
JUDGMENT
This is a suit filed by the Plaintiff for the relief of permanent injunction restraining Defendants from interfering with her peaceful possession and enjoyment and from alienation of the Suit Schedule Property to any third persons by creating forged documents and for costs of the suit.
2. The brief facts of the case of the Plaintiff are as follows:-
The Plaintiff is the absolute owner of the Suit Schedule Property bearing Vacant Site No.4, Khatha No.94/1, situated 3 O.S.No.25995/2017 at Yerraiahnapalya, Ramamurthynagar, Bengaluru, measuring East to West 20 feet and North to South 30 feet which is devolved to the Plaintiff from her mother under the Gift Deed dated: 3.3.2005 registered before the Sub- Registrar, Krishnarajapuram, Bengaluru. The Plaintiff is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same. The khatha of the property is mutated in the name of the Plaintiff and paying taxes to the concerned Revenue Department. On 19.3.2015, the Defendants tried to trespass into the Suit Schedule Property by constructing compound. In the month of August 2015 the Defendant No.1 put forth his intention to purchase the Suit Schedule Property. Initially, the Plaintiff was not agreed for the same, later on the insist of her husband, she agreed to sell the same. But, the Defendant postpone the negotiation for one or the other reason. As the Defendants were not coming forward for negotiation, on the request of the neighbouring owners, the Plaintiff tried to clean the Schedule Property. On 24.5.2017 the Defendants approached the Plaintiff while the cleaning work was under progress and threatened not to carryout 4 O.S.No.25995/2017 construction. The Plaintiff with an intention to put up shed on the Suit Schedule Property applied for temporary electricity connection and got the same twice. But, due to the interference of the Defendants, the said sanction was cancelled. The Defendants are making hectic efforts with an intention to grab the property and have created the documents in respect of the Suit Schedule Property and trying to alienate the same to the third parties and when the Plaintiff tried to resist the same, they demanded Rs.10,00,000/- from the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Plaintiff has lodged complaint against the Defendants in NCR No.776/2017. On the assurance of the Police the Plaintiff commenced the construction work, the Defendants with the support of local rowdy elements have caused hindrance in the construction and threatened the construction workers with dire consequences. Therefore, the Defendants cannot be prevented without an order of injunction from the court. Therefore, the Plaintiff has prayed to decree the suit.
3. Inspite of suit summons, the Defendant No.1 and 2 have appeared before the Court through their Counsel. The 5 O.S.No.25995/2017 Defendant No.1 filed a memo stating that he was not contesting the case. The Defendant No.2 has not filed any written statement in the present.
4. To prove his case, the Plaintiff got herself examined as P.W.1 and got marked document Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.41 and closed his side.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the Plaintiff.
6. Now the points that arise for the consideration of this Court are as follows:-
1) Whether Plaintiff proves that she is in lawful possession and enjoyment of the Suit Schedule Property as on the date of the suit?
2) Whether Plaintiff proves that Defendants have illegally interfering into her possession over the Suit Property?
3) Whether Plaintiff proves that Defendants are trying to alienate the Suit Schedule Property?
4) Whether Plaintiff is entitled for decree of 6 O.S.No.25995/2017 permanent injunction as sought in the plaint?
5) What decree or order?
7. My answers to the above points are as follows:-
Point No.1 : In the Affirmative.
Point No.2 : In the Affirmative.
Point No.3 : In the Affirmative.
Point No.4 : In the Affirmative.
Point No.5 : As per final orders for the following:
REASONS
8. Point No.1 to 3 :- As these points are inter- connected with each other, both the points are taken up together for consideration.
9. The Plaintiff claim is that, her title and possession of the Suit Schedule Property based on the Gift Deed executed by her mother Smt. Jayashree under registered Gift Deed dtd: 3.3.2005, since then the Plaintiff is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same, got mutated revenue entries in her name. The Plaintiff alleges 7 O.S.No.25995/2017 that on many occasions, the Defendants interfered with her possession over the Suit Schedule Property and tried to alienate the Suit Schedule Property by creating forged documents. In support of her case, the Plaintiff who got examined herself as P.W.1 has reiterated the plaint averments. She has produced Ex.P.1 Certified Copy of the Gift Deed dtd: 3.3.2005 executed by Smt. Jayashree. Ex.P.2 to Ex.P.14 are the Certified Copies of the Tax Paid Receipts. Ex.P.15 is the Certified Copy of the Encumbrance Certificate. Ex.P.16 is the copy of the Complaint dtd:19.3.2015. Ex.P.17 is the Endorsement issued by Police. Ex.P.18 and Ex.P.19 are the Office copy of Legal Notice dtd:26.2.2016. Ex.P.20, Ex.P.20(a) and Ex.P.20(b) are the Postal Receipts. Ex.P.21 is the receipt for payment towards purchase of construction materials. Ex.P.22 is the online money transfer receipt. Ex.P.23 is the copy of NCR No.776/2017. Ex.P.24 is the Official Memorandum of Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited. Ex.P.25 & Ex.P.26 are the Acknowledgement dtd: 13.7.2017 & 20.7.2017. Ex.P.27(a) & (b) are the Acknowledgement 8 O.S.No.25995/2017 dtd:25.7.2017. Ex.P.28 is the Bill dtd: 26.7.2017. Ex.P.29 is the Complaint and FIR dtd: 28.7.2017. Ex.P.30 is the Temporary Electricity Connection details dtd: 12.7.2017 and 13.7.2017. Ex.P.31 is the Acknowledgement dtd: 8.8.2017. Ex.P.32 is the Temporary Electricity Connection Renewal Bill dtd: 9.8.2017. Ex.P.33 to Ex.P.35 are the Assessment Extract issued by the BBMP. Ex.P.36 is the office copy of Notice. Ex.P.37 is the Notice given to the BBMP. Ex.P.38 is the Postal Receipt. Ex.P.39 is the Postal Acknowledgement. Ex.P.40 & Ex.P.41 are the Death Certificates Srinivasarao and Jayashree who are the parents of the Plaintiff. Therefore, these documents and the oral evidence of the PW.1 shows that the Plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the Plaint Schedule Property.
10. The Plaintiff has clearly stated that the Defendant has tried to interfere with her possession over the property. The Defendants have appeared through their Counsel before the Court. But, the Defendant No.1 filed memo stating that he was not interested in contesting the case. The Defendant No.2 inspite of several opportunities were 9 O.S.No.25995/2017 given, he has not filed any written statement and has not cross-examined the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff's claim remain unchallenged. This Court does not find any reason to disbelieve the case of the Plaintiff. The case of the Plaintiff is supported by documents. The mere apprehension in the mind of the Plaintiff that the Defendants would interfere with the possession of the Suit Schedule Property is sufficient to grant the relief of permanent injunction. Therefore, this Court holds that the Plaintiff has proved her possession over the Plaint Schedule Property and that the Defendants are trying to interfere with her possession over the Plaint Schedule Property and trying to alienate the same by creating forged documents. Hence, Point Nos.1 to 3 are answered in the Affirmative.
11. Point No.4:- In view of my answers to Point Nos.1 to 3 in the Affirmative, the Plaintiff is entitled for the decree of permanent injunction. Hence, this Point No.4 is answered in the Affirmative.
12. Point No.5:- In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following:-
10 O.S.No.25995/2017
ORDER The suit of the Plaintiff is decreed with costs. The Defendants are restrained by way of an order of injunction from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Plaintiff over the Plaint Schedule Property and from alienating the Suit Schedule Property in favour of any third party.
Draw up decree accordingly.
[Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 26th day of August 2021].
[K.M. Rajashekar], XXVIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Mayohall, Bangalore.
SCHEDULE PROPERTY All that piece and parcel of the Property bearing No.4, Khatha No.94/1, situated at Yerraiahnapalya, Ramamurthynagar, Bengaluru-560016, measuring East to West 30 feet and North to South 20 feet and bounded on: 11 O.S.No.25995/2017
East by : Kukkulumuniswamy Land.
West by : 20 Feet Road.
North by : 20 Feet Road.
South by : Site No.3.
ANNEXURE
1. List of witnesses examined for the Plaintiff:-
P.W.1 : S. Manju.
2. List of documents marked:-
Ex.P.1 : Certified Copy of the Gift Deed dtd: 3.3.2005.
Ex.P.2 to
Ex.P.14 : Certified Copies of the Tax Paid Receipts.
Ex.P.15 : Certified Copy of the Encumbrance Certificate.
Ex.P.16 : Copy of the Complaint dtd: 19.3.2015.
Ex.P.17 : Endorsement issued by Police.
Ex.P.18 &
Ex.P.19 : Office copy of Legal Notice dtd: 26.2.2016.
Ex.P.20,
Ex.P.20(a) &
Ex.P.20(b) : Postal Receipts.
Ex.P.21 : Receipt for payment towards purchase of
construction materials.
12 O.S.No.25995/2017
Ex.P.22 : Online money transfer receipt.
Ex.P.23 : Copy of NCR No.776/2017.
Ex.P.24 : Official Memorandum of Bangalore Electricity
Supply Company Limited.
Ex.P.25 &
Ex.P.26 : Acknowledgement dtd: 13.7.2017 & 20.7.2017.
Ex.P.27(a) &
Ex.P.27(b) : Acknowledgement dtd: 25.7.2017.
Ex.P.28 : Bill dtd: 26.7.2017.
Ex.P.29 : Complaint and FIR dtd: 28.7.2017.
Ex.P.30 : Temporary Electricity Connection details
dtd:12.7.2017 and 13.7.2017.
Ex.P.31 : Acknowledgement dtd: 8.8.2017.
Ex.P.32 : Temporary Electricity Connection Renewal Bill
dtd: 9.8.2017.
Ex.P.33 to
Ex.P.35 : Assessment Extract issued by the BBMP.
Ex.P.36 : Office copy of Notice.
Ex.P.37 : Notice given to the BBMP.
Ex.P.38 : Postal Receipt.
Ex.P.39 : Postal Acknowledgement.
13 O.S.No.25995/2017
Ex.P.40 &
Ex.P.41 : Death Certificates Srinivasarao and Jayashree.
3. List of witnesses examined for the Defendant:-
None.
4. List of documents marked:-
NIL.
(K.M. Rajashekar) XXVIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Mayohall, Bangalore.14 O.S.No.25995/2017
Judgment pronounced in open court vide separate judgment :-
ORDER The suit of the Plaintiff is decreed with costs. The Defendants are restrained by way of an order of injunction from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Plaintiff over the Plaint Schedule Property and from alienating the Suit Schedule Property in favour of any third party.
Draw up decree accordingly.
(K.M. Rajashekar) XXVIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Mayohall, Bangalore.15 O.S.No.25995/2017