- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34361 RSA No. 162 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.162 OF 2020 (POS) BETWEEN: 1. B SADANANDA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O LATE MUTHAPPA GOWDA 2. THIRUMALESHA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, S/O B SADANANDA GOWDA 3. LIKHITHESHA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, S/O B SADANANDA GOWDA ALL ARE R/AT HULIMANE OF BENGAMALE AIVERNADU VILLAGE AND POST SULLIA TALUK - 574 239 D.K.DISTRICT. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI D.KRISHNAMOORTHY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. B JANARDHANA GOWDA S/O LATE MUTHAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 2. GURUKIRANA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, S/O B JANARDHANA GOWDA Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34361 RSA No. 162 of 2020 3. GAUTHAMI AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, D/O B JANARDHANA GOWDA ALL ARE RESIDING AT HULIMANE OF BENGAMALE, AIVERNADU VILLAGE AND POST SULLIA TALUK - 574 239 D.K.DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HAREESH BHANDARY T, ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 08.11.2019 PASSED IN RA NO.06/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SULLIA., D.K. DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.03.2017 PASSED IN OS NO 66/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SULLIA. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri Krishnamurthy D, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Hareesh Bhandary, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Parties are also present. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents has filed affidavit signed by respondent No.1, which reads as under: “I, B.JANARDHANA GOWDA, S/o Late H.Muthappa Gowda, aged about 60 years, R/at H.No.VI-109, situated in - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34361 RSA No. 162 of 2020 Sy.No.276, Bengamale-Hulimane, Aivernadu village, Sonangeri Post, Sullia Taluk 574 239, D.K. District, now having come over to Bengaluru, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows: 1. I am the first respondent in the above appeal. I know the facts and circumstances of the case and hence deposing as hereunder: 2. I submit that the my brother/plaintiff Sri.B.Sadananda Gowda filed a suit in O.S.No.28/2023 for possession of the suit schedule property claiming a residential house situated in Sy.No.5/1A of Aivernadu village which was fallen to his share by virtue of the Registered Partition deed dated 02.11.2002 at 'B' schedule allotted to the plaintiff's share. 3. I submit that on the other hand, I contested the said suit by filing the written statement, I am residing in the house bearing No.VI/109 situated in Sy.No.276 which is adjacent to the Sullia Bellare PWD Road which is a government land. On the other hand, Sy.No.5/1A which is allotted to the share of the plaintiff/appellant is a varga land. 4. I submit that, in fact the very same plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.28/2003 seeking the relief of permanent prohibitory injunction, the Commissioner has submitted a report stating that there is no house 5/1A allotted to the share of the plaintiff and consequently the suit filed by the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34361 RSA No. 162 of 2020 plaintiff/appellant for permanent prohibitory injunction was dismissed. 5. I state that thereafter the plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.66/2008 for recovery of possession in respect of the very same house property situated in Sy.No.276 bearing VI/109. In the said suit too, the Commissioner was appointed and submitted a report which was prepared by the Surveyor and subsequently notified the existence of the house belongs to me situated in Sy.No.276/1. Based on the evidence and material documents suit of the plaintiff in O.S.NO.66/2008 came to be dismissed by judgment and decree dated 30.03.2017 by the Court of civil Judge of Sullia. Against which an appeal was preferred and the said appeal too came to be dismissed in R.A.No.6/2017 dated 08.11.2019 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sullia. Against which, the present appeal is filed. 6. I submit that in terms of the partition deed dated 02.11.2002 the ‘C' schedule fallen to my share which is a khadim varga land. The house No.6/109 situated in a government land away from the boundary of 5/1A, `B' schedule land allotted to the plaintiff. The Commissioner's report also specifies the house No.VI/109 is situated in Sy.No.276. 7. I submit that the house No.VI/109 is situated in Sy.No.276 is a government land and the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34361 RSA No. 162 of 2020 Commissioner's report filed on two occasions confirms the same and the plaintiff has no manner of right to claim the possession of the house situated n Sy.No.276. I submit that in terms of the observation made by the trial court and Appellate Court, I hereby declare that I am not holding an inch of land in Sy.No.5/1A allotted to the shareof the plaintiff and I am residing in the house No.VI/109 situated in Sy.No.276 in the Government land away from the varga land allotted to the share of the plaintiff 'B’ schedule land. WHEREFORE, I pray that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to dismiss the appeal of the appellant, in the interest of justice. So, I swear in the name of God that the contents of my affidavit are true and correct and I sign below.” 3. The present appeal is filed by the unsuccessful plaintiffs who have challenged the validity of the judgment passed in O.S.No.66/2008, which got confirmed in RA No.6/2017. 4. Gist of the dispute for the purpose of disposal of the present appeal is that there was previous registered partition deed vide Ex.P13, dated 02.11.2002. Thereafter, the parties - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34361 RSA No. 162 of 2020 were enjoying their respective shares in respect of the suit property. 5. There was a claim by the plaintiffs that house property situated in Sy.No.5/1A of Aivarnadu village, which was also the subject matter of suit in O.S.No.28/2003. A surveyor was appointed in the said suit, wherein a report is already filed. Suit house according to the said survey report is situated in Sy.No.276/1P1. 6. In view of the affidavit filed, Sri D. Krishnamurthy, learned counsel for the appellants submits that he would get a fresh survey done and if any space is left over in Sy.No.5/1A, he would occupy the same for which the respondents should not have any objection. 7. Sri. Hareesh Bhandary learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 submits that not an inch of land is left over in Sy.No.5/1A and if any such land is available, he has no objection for the appellants to enjoy the same. 8. Accordingly, placing the submission of Sri Hareesh Bhandari and the affidavit on record, the following order is passed. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34361 RSA No. 162 of 2020 ORDER (i) Appeal is disposed of placing the affidavit on record. (ii) Office is directed to pass modified decree, appending the copy of the affidavit as part of the decree. (iii) No order as to costs. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE MR