- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38118 RSA No. 2349 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 2349 OF 2012 (INJ) BETWEEN: G.C. NAGAREDDY S/O LATE G.CHIKKANNNA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, DRILL MASTER, RESIDING AT GUDIHALLI VILLAGE, TALUK HOBLI, CHALLAKERE TALUK- 577 522. &APPELLANT (BY SRI. P H VIRUPAKSHAIAH., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP.BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE- 560001. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHITRADURGA- 577 501. 3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PANCHAYAT RAJ ENGINEERING SUB-DIVISION, CHALLAKERE. 4. THE TAHSILDAR TALUK OFFICE, CHALLAKERE- 577522. Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38118 RSA No. 2349 of 2012 5. B.P.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, S/O NOT KNOWN, AGE 46 YEARS, SANGOLLIRAYANNA ROAD, I CROSS, CHALLAKERE- 577 522. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. KEMPANNA, AAG A/W SRI. G.RAMESH NAIK, AGA FOR R1 TO R4; R5 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE DTD 6.9.2012 PASSED IN R.A.NO.18/2012 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CHALLAKERE, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DTD 4.2.2012 PASSED IN OS.NO.67/2011 ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, MOLAKALMURU. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38118 RSA No. 2349 of 2012 ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is not yet admitted. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents, the appeal is taken up for final disposal. 2. The plaintiff filed a suit in OS.No.67/2011 on the file of Civil Judge (Jr.Dn), Molakalmuru for the relief of injunction. 3. The plaintiff claimed that the defendants should not obstruct the plaintiffs' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties and not to remove the trees and the bund in the suit schedule properties. 4. The suit is filed in respect of the suit properties bearing Sy.No.116 measuring 2 acres 14 guntas, Sy.No.117/2 measuring 1 acres 6 guntas, Sy.No.117/3 measuring 3 acres, Sy.No.120/1 measuring 6 acres and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38118 RSA No. 2349 of 2012 Sy.No.97/1P3 measuring 4 acres 20 guntas situated at Challakere Taluk, Talaku Hobli, Gudihalli Village. 5. Defendant No.3 filed Written Statement and contested the suit. The trial Court found that the plaintiff is not entitled to the relief and accordingly, dismissed the suit. 6. First Appellate Court also came to the conclusion that the plaintiff is not entitled to the relief and dismissed the appeal by confirming the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. 7. The issue No.1 is relating to the plaintiff's possession over the suit schedule properties and issue No.2 is relating to the trees and the bund referred to in the plaint as well as the description of the properties. 8. The trial Court has come to the conclusion that the plaintiff is the owner of the suit schedule properties. However, it has come to the conclusion that the ownership - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38118 RSA No. 2349 of 2012 and existence of the trees and the bund is not established and accordingly, dismissed the suit. 9. First Appellate Court concurring the finding of the trial Court held that the plaintiff has not established the existence of the trees and accordingly, dismissed the appeal. 10. This Court vide order dated 05.02.2020, had appointed the Surveyor as the Commissioner to measure properties bearing Sy.No.88, which is said to be a lake belonging to the respondent/State and the report was secured. Since it was urged that, the report was submitted that the survey was done without notice to the appellant, on 12.06.2025, this Court directed the jurisdictional Assistant Director of Land Records (for short 'ADLR') to conduct a survey after notice to the parties. 11. The jurisdictional ADLR, on 21.07.2025 has produced the survey report. The said survey report is taken on record. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38118 RSA No. 2349 of 2012 12. Both parties have not filed any objections to the said survey report dated 21.07.2025. The perusal of the said survey report would indicate that a portion of properties bearing Sy.Nos.115, 116, 117 and 120 are merged in property bearing Sy.No.88. 13. Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff/appellant would submit that the plea relating to merger was not raised by the defendants before the trial Court and as such the records relating to alleged merger not be looked into. It is his contention that, since the report would indicate that the portion in orange colour on the appellant's property and is said to have been merged in Sy.No.88, there has to be a decree for possession. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that only one property is purchased after the alleged merger and remaining properties with the plaintiff since the beginning from the plaintiff's ancestor. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38118 RSA No. 2349 of 2012 14. Learned Additional Advocate General would submit that the merger has taken place in accordance with law and the plaintiff has lost right over the properties, which are merged in Sy.No.88, as such the plaintiff/appellant is not entitled to the relief of injunction. 15. In support of his contention relating to merger, learned Additional Advocate General has produced the revenue records of the year 1902 and of subsequent years. It is urged that the plaintiff has not purchased the property, which is shown in the orange portion in the survey sketch as the alleged purchase has taken place after the merger. 16. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records. 17. As already noticed that the suit is only for bare injunction. Only defendant No.3 has contested the suit. The dispute relating to the encroachment or the alleged - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38118 RSA No. 2349 of 2012 merger has arisen only after the Courts secured the report from the jurisdictional ADLR, Challakere. 18. Since the respondent-State has come out with a plea that it is a case of merger of portion of properties bearing Nos.155, 116, 117 and 120 and is placing its hands on the revenue records of the year 1902 and subsequent years, this Court is of the view that the plaintiff should be given an opportunity to meet the said documents. Under these circumstances, this Court pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed in-part. ii) The impugned judgment and decree dated 04.02.2012 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Molakalmuru in OS.No.67/2011 and the judgment and decree dated 06.09.2012 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Challakere in RA.No.18/2012 are to be set aside and accordingly, set aside. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38118 RSA No. 2349 of 2012 iii) The matter is remitted to the trial Court for fresh consideration in accordance with law. iv) Since new contentions are raised before this Court relating to the merger, the plaintiff is at liberty to amend the plaint by seeking appropriate relief and the respondent-State is also at liberty to file Written Statement and additional Written Statement in support of its plea relating to the merger. v) Thereafter, the parties are to be permitted to give additional evidence, if they wish to, and later the Court shall decide the case in accordance with the law. vi) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. vii) Since the existence of the bund is not in dispute and since the photographs produced before this Court will also reveal the existence of some trees, if not all the trees mentioned in the plaint, there shall - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38118 RSA No. 2349 of 2012 not be any further changes in the nature of the property, till the suit is decided. viii) The parties shall appear before the trial Court on 17.10.2025 without any further notice. ix) The Registry of this Court shall send the report submitted by the ADLR to the trial Court along with the other records forthwith. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE PHM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11