- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 149 OF 2020 (DEC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. THIMMAKKA W/O LATE SRI NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS R/O JYOTHI NAGAR NELAMANGALA TOWN BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY HER GPA HOLDER SRI N MURTHY S/O LATE SRI NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/O JYOTHI NAGAR NELAMANGALA TOWN BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT …APPELLANT (BY SRI. BASAVANNA K .M.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. JAYAMMA W/O LATE SRI RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS NO.169, 6TH MAIN ROAD 5TH CROSS RAJAGOPAL NAGAR PEENYA II STAGE Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 BENGALURU-560058. 2. R ARUN S/O LATE SRI RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS NO.169, 6TH MAIN ROAD 5TH CROSS RAJAGOPAL NAGAR PEENYA II STAGE BENGALURU-560058. 3. RAVI W/O LATE SRI RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS NO.169, 6TH MAIN ROAD 5TH CROSS RAJAGOPAL NAGAR PEENYA II STAGE BENGALURU-560058. 4. BASAVARAJ S/O LATE SRI GANGA RUDRAIAH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/O JOGIPALYA HAMLLET BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 5. RAJANNA S/O LATE SRI RANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O JOGIPALYA HAMLLET BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 6. NANJUNDAIAH S/O LATE SRI RANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/O JOGIPALYA HAMLLET BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 7. MUNIBYRAIAH S/O LATE SRI RANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/O JOGIPALYA HAMLLET BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 8. DODDAHANUMAKKA W/O SRI THIMMAIAH R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 9. GALI HANUMAIAH S/O SRI POOJAHANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 10. HANUMAIAH S/O SRI POOJAHANUMAIAH - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 11. KEMPARASAMMA W/O LATE SRI THIMMARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 12. MASTER KUMAR S/O LATE SRI THIMMARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 13. HANUMAKKA D/O SRI GANGAHANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 14. GOVINDARAJU S/O SRI VENKATARAMAPPA AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 15. VENKATAPPA S/O SRI KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 16. ANJANAPPA S/O SRI KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 17. VENKATARAMAIAH S/O SRI KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 18. THIMMARAYAPPA S/O SRI KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 19. THIMMARAYAPPA S/O LATE SRI CHIKKAHANUMAIAH SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS THIMMARAYAPPA S/O LATE SRI THIMMARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 20. MANJAMMA D/O LATE SRI THIMMARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 21. GANGAMMA D/O LATE SRI THIMMARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 22. HANUMANTHARAYAPPA S/O LATE SRI THIMMARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 23. NAGESHAIAH SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS KEMPAKKA - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 W/O LATE SRI NAGESHAIAH AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 24. SHANTHAMMA D/O LATE SRI NAGESHAIAH AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 25. HUCCHAMMA D/O LATE SRI NAGESHAIAH AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 26. LAKSHMAMMA D/O LATE SRI NAGESHAIAH AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 27. JAYAMMA D/O LATE SRI NAGESHAIAH AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 28. LAKSHMAMMA D/O LATE SRI NAGESHAIAH AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 29. HANUMAIAH S/O LATE SRI HANUMAIAH SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS SRI RAJANNA S/O LATE SRI HANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 30. MANJUNATH S/O LATE SRI HANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 31. KARIYAPPA S/O LATE SRI POOJAGANGAIAH AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O BYRASANDRA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 32. LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE SRI SIDDALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O NO.171, II CROSS, IV MAIN ROAD, II PHASE, MANJUNATH NAGAR BENGALURU-560010. 33. BYLEGOWDA S/O LATE SRI KALAIAH AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O CHIKKAPUTTAIAHANA PALYA KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T.SESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R7; SRI. P.M.SIDDAMALLAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R14, R18, R22, R29 AND R30; SRI. B.M.GUNJAL., ADVOCATE FOR R32; R11 AND R17 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.12.2019 PASSED IN RA NO 03/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREED DATED18.11.2011 PASSED IN OS NO 129/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NELAMANGALA. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 THIS RSA, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri. Basavanna K.M, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri. T.Seshagiri Rao, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 7. Sri P.M.Siddmallappa, learned counsel for respondent Nos.14, 18, 22, 29 and 30 and Sri. B.M. Gunjal, learned counsel for respondent No.32 are absent. 2. Defendant No.1 is the appellant before this Court challenging the order of the First Appellate Court, whereby the First Appellate Court reversed the dismissal of the suit and decreed the suit without affording the opportunity for the defendant to contest the additional evidence and without disposing off the said application. 3. At the outset, it is to be noted that O.S.No.129/2009 was dismissed on the ground of - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 jurisdiction as the subject matter of the suit property was service inam land. 4. Plaintiffs filed an appeal before the First Appellate Court in R.A.No.3/2012. In the said appeal, plaintiffs also filed an application under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 5. Without holding any enquiry nor affording the opportunity for the defendant to contest the probative value of the additional evidence, First Appellate Court accepted the additional evidence and decreed the suit of plaintiffs by reversing the judgment of the Trial Court. 6. Validity of the said judgment of the First Appellate Court is called in question in the present appeal. 7. In the appeal, following substantial questions of law have been raised: (i) Whether the First Appellate Court is justified in granting judgment and decree on the basis of exhibit P1 dated 27.09.2001 and exhibit P7 dated 04.07.1963 holding the schedule land is a service inam land enures to the benefits of the Plaintiffs as per the provisions of the - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 Act of 1961 ignoring the grant made in favour of the predecessors of Defendant Nos. 2 to 17 on the basis of the grant orders exhibits D2 & D3 dated 08.09.1959 and 14.08.1959 as per the provisions of Act of 1954 as declared by this Hon'ble Court in case of Stumps Sulae and Somappa Pvt. Ltd. Vs Chandrappa reported in ILR 1985 KAR 3872 and Muniyappa Vs State reported in ILR 1991 KAR 3504? (ii) Whether the First Appellate Court is justified in granting judgment and decree relying on exhibits P1 & P7 despite exhibit P1 is not the re-grant order and the persons who have executed the sale deed dated 04.07.1963 (exhibit P7) in favour of Sri. Dasappa are not the LR's of the occupants of the seven families of the occupants as per grant orders exhibits D2 & D3? (ii) Whether the First Appellate Court is justified in granting judgment and decree despite there are no material documents to show that the schedule land is a service inam land and the Plaintiffs are the inferior office holders (Barawardhars) as defined under the Act of 1961? (iv) Whether the First Appellate Court is justified in granting judgment and decree despite the barr under the provisions of the Act of 1954 in entertaining the suit without challenging the validity of the grant orders exhibits D2 & D3 before the Appellate Authority? (v) Whether the First Appellate Court is justified in granting judgment and decree on the basis of additional evidence (exhibits P8 to P10) without affording an opportunity to the Defendants at the Appellate stage of the proceedings? (vi) Whether the First Appellate Court is justified in granting judgment and decree in issuing an order of injunction for the first time after rejection of such request made before the Trail Court on 23.07.2004 on IA No.4 which was affirmed by this Hon'ble Court in MFA No.7074/2004 on 17.03.2006? (vii) Whether the First Appellate Court is justified in granting judgment and decree declaring the Plaintiffs as the owners/occupants without there being any iota of - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 evidence to show that they are the LR's of the holders/Barawardhars of the Inferior Office of Thoti of Byrasandra village? (viii) Whether the First Appellate Court is justified in granting judgment and decree holding that the order exhibit P1 is a re-grant order in favour of Plaintiff No.7 who is even the Barawardhar of Thoti family enuring the benefit of re-grant order to the other Plaintiffs as the owners/occupants? (ix) Whether the First Appellate Court is justified in granting judgment and decree on the premises that the Byrasandra village is not included in the notification dated 13.01.1959 bearing No.RD3MIN 58 under the Act of 1954 and as such the grant orders exhibits D2 & D3 in favour of the seven occupants treating as nature of the land as sthala inam can be ignored, while treating the re-grant order as per exhibit P1 under the Act of 1961 enuring to the benefits of the Plaintiff No.7 thereby enures to the other Plaintiffs? (x) Whether the First Appellate Court is justified in granting judgment and decree declaring the Plaintiffs as owners ignoring the rights of Defendant No.1 as per exhibit P6 who is a bonafide purchaser having effected improvements over the schedule land after acting upon the sale deed (exhibit P6) dated 29.11.2002?. 8. Since the First Appellate Court has committed an error in not holding an enquiry in respect of additional evidence placed before it and accepting the additional evidence and decreeing the suit has resulted in miscarriage of justice. - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 9. Thus, without adverting to the substantial questions of law raised in the appeal, appeal can be disposed off by setting aside the order of the First Appellate Court and permitting the plaintiffs to place the additional evidence before the Trial Court for fresh adjudication after affording suitable opportunity for the defendant. 10. Sri. T.Seshagiri Rao, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.1 to 7 after perusal of the judgment of the First Appellate Court submits that though the contentions taken by the appellant/defendant is incorrect, there is a procedural lapse on the part of the First Appellate Court inasmuch as an opportunity ought to have been given to the defendant with regard to the additional evidence placed by plaintiffs before the First Appellate Court. 11. In view of the same, this Court is of the considered opinion that the matter needs to be remitted to the Trial Court for fresh adjudication after affording - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 necessary opportunity for both the parties including the placing of additional evidence on record. Hence, this Court pass the following : ORDER i) The appeal is allowed. ii) The impugned judgment dated 07.12.2019 on the file of the learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District in RA.No.3/2012, is hereby set aside. iii) The matter is remitted to the Trial Court for fresh adjudication in O.S.No.129/2009 after affording necessary opportunities for both the parties and allowing the plaintiff to place the additional evidence on record. iv) It is made clear that, this court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the matter. - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36023 RSA No. 149 of 2020 v) Taking note of the fact that, the suit is of the year 2009, the matter needs to be expedited. In that regard, parties shall appear before the Trial Court without further notice positively on 26.09.2025. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE PHM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32