- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14086-DB RFA No. 296 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.296 OF 2015 (DEC/POS) BETWEEN: 1. SRI A. NARAYANASWAMY S/O. ANNAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS 2. SRI MUNISWAMY SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS SRI BHEEMA @ NAGARAJ S/O. MUNISWAMY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 3. SRI VAJRAMUNI S/O. MUNISWAMY AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS 4. SMT. SAROJA W/O. RAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS 5. SMT. PACHAMMA W/O. LATE A. MUNISWAMY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14086-DB RFA No. 296 of 2015 ALL ARE RESIDING AT NAINAPPASHETTYPALYA BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK-562 123 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI T. SESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. GANGAMMA W/O. BYRAHANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT NO.37, 4TH B CROSS MAHALAKSHMI LAY-OUT BENGALURU-560 086 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI G. JANARDHANA, ADVOCATE FOR C/RESPONDENT) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 R/W ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.12.2014 PASSED IN O.S.NO.4221/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE XIV ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE, (CCH-28), PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION, POSSESSION, MESNE PROFITS. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14086-DB RFA No. 296 of 2015 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The present regular first appeal has been filed under Section 96 read with Order 41 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) against the judgment and decree dated 19.12.2014 passed by the XIV Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-28) in O.S.No.4221/2009. The appellants were the defendants whereas the respondent was the plaintiff. 2. The plaintiffs had filed this suit for following the reliefs: "i. To declare that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the schedule property, ii. Grant an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property, iii. In the alternative if the Court finds that the plaintiff is not in possession of the suit schedule property then direct the defendants to deliver the possession of the suit property to the plaintiff. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14086-DB RFA No. 296 of 2015 SCHEDULE The property which is the subject matter of the suit are as hereunder: All that piece and parcel of the house property bearing Gramatana house list No.376/1 V.P. Khata No.325/1. Subsequently having PID No.65-348-20, in the register of Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike situated at Nainappa Shetty Palya, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, now Bangalore-560076, measuring East to West 43-0 feet and North to South 50-0 in all 2150 Sq.ft. along with one square A.C. sheet house and bounded on the East by : House belonging to Rajashekhar, West by : House belonging to Singh, North by : Anjaneya Swamy Temple, old stone house occupied by Sagar Muniyappa. South by : Road." 3. The impugned decree has been passed in respect of the property bearing Gramatana House List No.376/1, V P Khata No.325/1, subsequently having PID No.65-348-20 in the register of Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike situated at Nainappashetty palya, Beguru Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14086-DB RFA No. 296 of 2015 4. The claim of the appellants/defendants is that they are the owner in possession of the property in Sy. No. 60/1 of Nainappa Shetty Palya, Beguru Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk and they have nothing to do with the suit schedule property. 5. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that they are the owner in possession of their property situated in Sy. No. 60/1. The plaintiff/respondent may execute his decree in respect to the suit schedule property which is said to be situated in Gramatana House List No.376/1, V P Khata No.325/1, subsequently having PID No.65-348-20 situated at Nainappa Shetty Palya, Beguru Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk. 6. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that if the decree is executed in respect of the gramtana property, he has no objection inasmuch as he is the owner in possession of his property is situated in Sy. No. 60/1. 7. Mr.G.Janardhana, learned counsel for the respondent-plaintiff also does not dispute this contention that the suit schedule property is gramtana property and he will execute the decree accordingly. With respect to the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14086-DB RFA No. 296 of 2015 location/situation of the property, the executing Court will take a call to determine the exact location of the property in question. With the aforesaid observations, the appeal is disposed of. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE RKA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3