- (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)These appeals are directed against the judgment of the High Court of Karnataka confirming the judgment of the trial court and dismissing the first appeals RFA No. 50/90 and RFA No. 53/90.
(3.)The appellant filed two suits O. S. No. 3262/82 and O. S. No. 198/83 citing the respondents as defendants. In O. S. No. 3262/82, he sought declaration of his title over the suit property and sought a decree of permanent injunction against the defendants. In O. S. No. 198/83 the plaintiff challenged the validity of the sale deed dated 17/8/1955 executed by his mother lakshmakka for herself and as guardian of the plaintiff who was then a minor, in favour of defendant no. 1 Doddamuniyappa, who is respondent no. 1 herein. The case of the plaintiff in the former suit was that the suit property, a piece of vacant land described by the letters EFGH in exhibit p. 21 was a part of his property under khata no. 48; and that the defendant no. 1 has no title to or possession over the said property. The defendant no. 1 who alone contested the suit took the stand that the suit land EFGH is not a part of khata no. 48 but it is a part of his land in khata no 49 which he purchased from the mother, the plaintiff under the sale deed dated 178 1955 exhibit D-6 it is relevant to state here that the properties under khata no 48 and khata no 49 lie adjacent to each other, indeed the portions of properties in khata no 48 lie on both sides of the property in khata no 49 On both sides of the property in khata no 49 are lands with or without structures on it, belonging to the plaintiff.