THE COURT OF THE CITY CIVIL JUDGE: BANGALORE
1] Smt. Muni Thayyamma,
SL.No.2 to 4 & 6 ae the daughters of and Sl.No.
5 is the son of Late Hanumappa, the all are residing at Allahalsandra Village,
Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk.
// Vs //
Defendants 1. Achuthan.
S/o Late. Chami Nair
Aged about 59 years,
R/at . No.8, 3rd Cross
Ist Main, Ist Stage
6th Phase, West of Chord Road,
Bangalore 560 044.
2. The Judicial Employee House Building Co-op. Society Ltd., High Court Building, Bangalore 1.
UNDER ORDER VII RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, the Plaintiffs above named humbly begs to state as follows :
1. The address of the parties fr the purpose of service of court notices and other processes is as stated above in the cause title and that of the Plaintiffs Counsel Siyuths: H.P. Leeladhar and M R Venugopal, No. 13, Maruthi Lodge, Room No. 1, Park Road, Bangalore 560 053.
2 The plaintiff the absolute owner in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land bearing S.No. 12/1, of Allasandra Village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, Measuring 1 acre 26 guntas including 4 guntas of Phut Kharab which is morefully dewscribed in the Schedule hereunder. Originally, the suit schedule property belonged to Sri. Venkataramanappa, father of the plaintiff and after his death, the plaintiff has succeeded to the estate of her later father Venkataramanappa and because the owner of the suit schedule property.
3. plaintiff belongs to Adi Karnataka Community which is a Scheduled Caste and a poor gullible women. She is producing herewith the Caste Certificate andmarked as DOCUMENT NO. 1.
4. The plaintiffs submits that the suit schedule property originally belonged to late Venkataramanappa the father of the Plaintiff. s the ancestral property of the said Venkataramanappa and that he was a peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said land Due to financial crisis, the said property was mortgaged to one Venkataramanappa under a Registered Mortage Deed Thereafter, the plaintiff has redeened the mortgage and now she is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same as absolute owner thereof. The plaintiff is producing herewith copy of the pahanis is proof of the same showing that the plaintiff was and is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properoty and marked as DOCUMENTS NO. 2 and 5, and the Encumbrance Certificate is DOCUMENT No. 6.
5. The plaintiff submits that, when that being the case, the defendants who is entirely a stranger to the suit schedule property who has no manner of right title or interest inthe suit schedule property or in an portion thereof in active collusion with the jurisdictional police is trying to interfere with the plaintiffs peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property and trying to put up illegal and unauthorized construction in the suit schedule property. In that regard, the suit schedule property. In that regard, the plaintiff has lodged a complaint before the Yelahanka Police Station and sought for protection from the illegal and high-handed acts of the defendant. The Plaintiff is producing herewith acknowledgement of the police in having received the complaint and marked as DOCUMENT No. 7.
6. The plaintiff submits that, during the month of October 1996, the defendant and his henchmen tried to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property illegally without any maner of right, title or interest. At that time, the Khata and the pahanis were standing in the name of the mortgager thought he mortgage was redeemed and khatha and pahanis were not transferred in the plaintiffs name an in order to protect from the illegal interference by the defendant and his benchmen, the plaintiff was forced to file a suit in O.S. No.7460/1996 on the file of the Additional City Civcl Judge, Bangalore City (CCH.No. 14) for permanent injunction and other reliefs as a Power of Attorney Holder. The Hont Court was pleased to grant exparte order of temporary injunction. The plaintiff is producing herewith copy of the exparte interim injunction order restraining the defendant and his henchman from interfering with the suit schedule property and marked as DOCUMENT NO. 6.
submits that subsequently, the defendant has put his appearance and has also filed written
The Honble Court after hearing both the parties passed an order dismissing the I.A. stating that --
mortgage has already been redeemed and according to the plaintiff himself, he is also not in possession of the
of Attorney has not
filed this suit as individual right to file this suit
as representative of the plaintiff who admittedly
On the above finding the interim application was rejected. Thereafter, the plaintiff who filed the above suit as a Power of Attorney Holder withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit individually having been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property as absolute owner thereof. Hence,, this suit. The plaintiff is herewith producing cpy of the order passed on I.A. No. 1 and the orders passed on application under Order 23 Rules 1 and 3 of the Code of Civil Procedures and marked as DOCUMENTS NO. 9 & 10.
8. The plaintiff further submits that, the defendant who stopped interfering with the plaintiffs peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property once again stsa started to interfere with the plaintiffs, peaceful possession and tried to trespass and attempted to put up foundation since yesterday though he was advised not to do so and the request of the plaintiff feel to the deaf ears of the defendant. So, in order to protect the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property, the plaintiff has approached this Honble Court for permanent injunction and for other reliefs as prayed for.
9. The cause of action for the suit arose on 21-08-1997 when the defendant and his henchmen illegally and unauthorized tried to enter upon and interfere with the plaintiffs peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property which is within the jurisdiction of this Honble Court and this Honble Court has got jurisdiction to try this suit.
10. The value of the suit for the purpose of court fee and jurisdictin is as per the valuation slip annexed herewith and the requisite court fee is paid on this plaint.
11. The plaintiff submits that he has not filed any other suit on the same cause of action in any other court either at Bangalore or elsewhere.
WHEREFORE, the plaintiff above named humbly prays that the Hont Court be pleased to pass a judgement and decree against the defendants.
(a) For permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his agents and servants or anybody acting or claiming on his behalf
From entering upon and interfering with the plaintiffs peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property.
(b) To pay the costs of these proceedings.
© To prays any order or orders as this Honble Court deems fit to pass in the circumstances of the case.
To meet the ends of justice.
West by : Land belonging to Puttanna.
North by : Properties belonging to Veerappa Reddy & Mrs Lakshmamma.
South by : Lands belonging to Doddaiah and Y Marappa.
ADVOCATE FOR PLAINTIFFS.
[ Signatures ]