Being aggrieved, the appellant herein preferred Regular First Appeal No.412 of 1988 under Section 96 of CPC in the High Court of Karnataka.
On 8.5.1984, the appellant herein filed the present suit number1518 of 1984 i.e. within two years from the date of the decision of the High Court dated 24.11.1982 in RSA No.801/75 filed by N. Narayana Reddy, for possession of land admeasuring 1 acre 21 gunthas.
The facts on which this appeal has arisen are as follows One Bayyanna was owner of the suit land in Survey No.19/1 admeasuring 3 acres 12 gunthas.
However, he was found to be in possession of the entire 3 acres 12 gunthas and, therefore, the Principal Munisff granted permanent injunction in favour of N. Narayana Reddy restraining the appellant herein from interfering with the possession of N. Narayana Reddy on the entire suit land admeasuring 3 acres 12 gunthas with liberty to the appellant herein to take steps to recover possession of 1 acres 21 gunthas out of the total area of 3 acres 12 gunthas by following due process of law.
Consequently, the judgment and decree passed in suit number357/60 dated 7.4.1971 reached finality on 24.11.1982.
In that suit, as stated above, the appellant was the defendant.
In the said suit, it was held that the appellant herein admittedly stood ousted in 1971 and, therefore, the said suit was barred by limitation as it was filed after 13 years from dispossession.
His further defence was that the suit land was Inam land and that he was registered as Khadim tenant by the Inam Abolition Authorities.
Bayyanna sold the suit land to N. Narayana Reddy since deceased father of the respondents herein, vide registered sale deed dated 4.11.1958.
Thereafter, N. Narayana Reddy filed Regular Second Appeal No.801 of 1975 in the High Court of Karantaka, which came to be dismissed on 24.11.1982.
It was further urged that the appellant was entitled to the benefit of section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, as the earlier litigation instituted by N. Narayana Reddy came to an end only on 24.11.1982 when the High Court in RSA No.801/75 companyfirmed the decree dated 7.4.1971 passed by the Principal Munsiff in suit number357/60.
By the impugned judgment, the High Court rejected the companytention advanced on behalf of the appellant that the period of limitation companymenced only after the decision of the High Court of Karantaka in RSA No.801/75, filed by Narayana Reddy, decided on 24.11.1982.
Thereafter, N. Narayana Reddy filed RSA No.801/75 which was dismissed by the High Court on 24.11.1982.
This admission of the appellant in that suit indicates ouster from possession of the appellant herein.
By the impugned judgment, the High Court companyfirmed the dismissal of the suit by the trial Court by holding that the present suit has been filed much beyond 12 years.
The First Appellate Court dismissed the said Regular Appeal vide judgment dated 13.1.1975.
In the present case, earlier suit number357/60 was filed by the said N. Narayana Reddy, which was partly decreed and, therefore, he preferred Regular Appeal No.45/71 which was dismissed by the First Appellate Court on 13.1.1975.
In the present case, on the facts of this case as stated above, section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 cannot be invoked by the appellant as the appellant herein had never challenged the findings on possession recorded by the Principal Munsiff vide decree dated 7.4.1971.
By the aforestated judgment, the Principal Munsiff, Bangalore came to the companyclusion that N. Narayana Reddy was in possession of the entire area admeasuring 3 acres 12 gunthas that the entire area was Inam lands and since an area admeasuring 1 acre 21 gunthas out of total area admeasuring 3 acres 12 gunthas was regranted by the Deputy Commissioner to the appellant herein, N. Narayana Reddy was number the owner of the entire area admeasuring 3 acres 12 gunthas.
The said suit was instituted in the Court of Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as the trial Court .
N. Narayana Reddy had instituted suit number357/60 in the Court of Principal Second Munsiff, Bangalore for recovery of possession based on title and for permanent injunction against the appellant herein on the ground that the appellant was trying to interfere with his possession.
The defence of the appellant herein in the above suit was that he had purchased the suit land on 27.11.1959 from B. Bayyanna and that he was in possession of the suit land.
Hence, this civil appeal.
In his evidence, appellant had admitted that he was in possession of the suit property up to 1971.
Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 7.4.1971, N. Narayana Reddy preferred Regular Appeal No.45 of 1971.
Consequently, the trial Court dismissed the suit.
The suit land was Inam land.
KAPADIA, J. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 27th May, 1997 passed by the High Court of Karnataka in R.F.A. No.412 of 1988, the original plaintiff has companye to this Court by this appeal.
In the present case, in suit number357/60 instituted by N. Narayana Reddy in the Court of Principal Munsiff, Bangalore, evidence of the appellant herein was recorded.
By judgment and order dated 7.4.1971, the Principal Munsiff, Bangalore partly decreed the suit filed by N. Narayana Reddy holding him to be the owner of only 1 acre 21 gunthas and number of the entire land admeasuring 3 acres 12 gunthas.
