Injection on (halla /stream paramboku) landed property
Raghavendra chitragar
(Querist) 18 March 2013
This query is : Resolved
Sir
We request you to please reply this matter
Sirs we file a case last December of 2012 till today court is not granted an injunction order and the defendants has appeared before the court and file vakalat but written statement is not filed till today can we get injunction order please reply the complete details and below mentioned plaint copy for your reference please reply
1. The Plaintiff Smt. Lalithamma is aged about 68 years and she is unable to move about due to hypertension, diabetes, etc., and hence she has appointed her son Raghavendra as lawful attorney.The power of attorney holder Raghavendra is well acquainted with the facts of this case and able to depose the same before the Hon’ble Court
2. The Plaintiff’s mother Smt. Hanumanthamma,w/o Late Hemaddrappa and her ancestors were cultivating 6 acres 18 guntas bearing Sy No.151/6 situate at No.23 Sanganakallu Bellary Taluk, fully described in the schedule from time immemorial.Even though the said land was described as halla paramboku no halla or stream is flowing in the schedule land .
3. The Plaintiff’s Mother Smt, Hanumanthamma and her ancestors cultivated the said land.The Govt of Karnataka also issued Patta and receipt book to Smt. Hanumanthamma paid taxes till her death in the year 1998.After the death of Smt. Hanumanthamma ,the plaintiff Smt. Lalithamma and her brother’s and sister’s inherited the said property as the plaintiff’s brothers and other sisters were living at far off places, the plaintiff began to cultivate the schedule land after the death of her mother Smt. Hanumanthamma and she is also paying taxes under Khata No.22
4. The Plaintiff’s mother’s name is forthcoming in the record of rights up to the year 1998-99 and subsequently, after computerization of land records her name has been deleted for the reason best known to the revenue officials. The Plaintiff is in actual and physical possession of the plaint schedule land till today.
5. The defendants have absolutely no right, title or interest over the plaint schedule land. The defendants are permanent resident of Moka village, Bellary Taluk, The defendants are powerful and influential persons and on 01.06.2012 the defendants attempted to dispossess the plaintiff by show of force.
6. The Power of attorney holder and his brothers resisted the same and the plaintiff has also reported the matter to the police on 27.06.2012, but the police have not taken any action against the defendants. The plaintiff cannot protect her possession of the schedule land unless an order of injunction in granted restraining the defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession of the schedule land in any manner, otherwise the plaintiff will be put great hardship and irreparable injury.
7. The plaintiff has developed the schedule land by investing huge amount .Without prejudice to the contentions raised above, the plaintiff submits that she has perfected her title by adverse possession also as the plaintiff and her mother have been in possession of the schedule land property openly, continuously and without any obstructions for the more than 60 years .The Plaintiff has got prima facie case and that the balance of convenience is in her favor. A Separate application for temporary injunction is also filed.
8. Cause of action arose against the defendants when plaintiff’s mother Smt, Hanumanthamma, W/o Late Hemadrappa Cultivated the land since time immemorial and after the death of Smt, Hanumanthamma in the year 1998 when the plaintiff started cultivating the plaint schedule land and paid the taxes and on 01.06.2012 when the defendants without any right, title or interest over the plaint schedule land, attempted to dispossess the plaintiff from the plaint schedule land and a continuing one at 23.Sanganakallu Bellary Taluk, where the schedule land is situate, within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble court .
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 18 March 2013
It is a good case for interim injunction order. Ask the court to fix date of contested hearing of injunction petition.
It rejects the prayer for injunction then go for Miscellaneous Appeal in District Judge.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 18 March 2013
Let the reply of the opposite party come if there are not compelling circumstances to press for stay order till then.
