- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5312 RFA No. 1362 of 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1362 OF 2007 (DEC/PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. THOTTI NARAYANAPPA @ NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/O SHIVANAPURA VILLAGE NANDAGUDI HOBLI HOSAKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY LR's OF APPELLANT NOS.1(B) TO (F) 1(A). MUNIYAMMA W/O LATE THOTI NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY LR's OF APPELLANT NOS. 1(B) TO (F) 1(B). NARAYANASWAMY S/O LATE THOTI NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 1(C). MANJULA W/O LATE CHANNAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS SECOND SON'S WIFE 1(D). CHANNARAYAPPA S/O LATE THOTI NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5312 RFA No. 1362 of 2007 1(E). CHENNAMMA D/O LATE THOTI NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS 1(F). SMT. YASHODAMA W/O NARAYANSAWMY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT SHIVNAPURA VILLAGE NANDAGUDI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. P.M. SIDDAMALLAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT NO.1[B TO D AND F]; VIDE ORDER DATED 03.02.2023, APPELLANT NO.1 [B TO F] ARE TREATED AS LR's OF APPELLANT NO.1(A); SRI. H.M. KISHORE KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR APPELLANT NO.1[E]) AND: 1. SMT. CHENNAMMA W/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA R/AT SHIVANAPURA VILLAGE NANDAGUDI HOBLI HOSKOTE TALUKA BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY LR's OF RESPONDENT NOS.4 TO 10 2. SMT. NARAYANAMMA W/O NARANASWAMY R/O THIMMASANDRA HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL 3. SMT. MUNIYAMMA W/O ANJANAPPA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5312 RFA No. 1362 of 2007 SINCE DEAD BY LR's OF RESPONDENT NO.3 3(A). ANJINAPPA W/O LATE MUNIYAMMA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT MUGWALA HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 4. SRI. MUTHAPPA S/O SANJEEVAPPA MAJOR 5. SRI. BHEEMAPPA S/O SANJEEVAPPA MAJOR 6. ANJANAPPA S/O SANJEEVAPPA MAJOR 7. SRI. NARAYANASWAMY S/O SRI. SANJEEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS 8. 9. SRI. MANJU S/O SANJEEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS SRI. MUNIRAJU S/O SANJEEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY LR's OF RESPONDENT NO.9 9(A). GOWTHAMI D/O LATE MUNIRAJU AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5312 RFA No. 1362 of 2007 10. MUNIYAPPA S/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT SHIVANAPURA VILLAGE NANDAGUDI HOBLI HOSAKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.D. BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R3[A] & R9[A] [VIDE ORDER DATED 03.02.2023]; SRI. M.D. BASAVANNA, ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R8 & R10; R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; VIDE ORDER DATED 03.02.2023, R4 TO R10 ARE TREATED AS LR's OF DECEASED R1) THIS RFA IS FILED U/S 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.03.2007 PASSED IN OS.NO.917/1995 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION, PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL JUDGMENT The appellant who is a plaintiff in O.S.No.917/1995 is before this Court seeking to set aside the judgment and decree dated 29.03.2007 passed in the said suit on file the Court of 1st Addl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn), Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5312 RFA No. 1362 of 2007 by which suit of the plaintiff for relief of declaration and recovery of possession came to dismissed. 2. It is the case of the plaintiff that land in Sy.No.173 of Shivanapura village, totally measured 4 acres 39 guntas. That under the deed of sale dated 04.02.1944 an extent of 2 acres 39 guntas was purchased in the joint names of plaintiff and the father of the defendant No.1/Nanjappa and remaining extent of 2 acres of land was purchased under the deed of sale dated 24.02.1959 exclusively in the name of the plaintiff. That the said land was subject matter of proceedings under Inam Abolition Act, 1954 and in Case Nos.1574/1963-64 and 1575/1964 before the Land Tribunal, in which occupancy rights in respect of entire extent of 4 acres 39 guntas of land was jointly conferred in the names of the plaintiff/appellant and the father of the defendant No.1. 3. Contention of the plaintiff is that though the said orders which are produced in Exs.P29 and P32 reflect joint confirmation of occupancy right, they have to be read as if an extent of 2 acres 39 guntas was jointly conferred in the names of the plaintiff and the father of the defendant No.1 and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5312 RFA No. 1362 of 2007 another 2 acres of land was exclusively granted in the name of the plaintiff. 4. Since the dispute is essentially with regard to the extent of land mentioned in the orders passed by the Land Tribunal in Case Nos.1574/1963-64 and 1575/1964, learned counsel appearing for the legal representatives of plaintiff/appellant after arguing the matter for sometime seeks liberty to withdraw the appeal to pursue such remedy as may be available and permissible under law. 5. Submission is placed on record. 6. Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the plaintiff/appellant to seek such remedy as may be permissible and available under law. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RU, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20