Case Note & Summary
The Regular First Appeal was filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, by the defendants (appellants) challenging the judgment and decree dated 10.10.2018 passed in O.S.No.9/2016 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bagalkot. The suit was filed by the respondent/plaintiff seeking a mandatory injunction and other reliefs, alleging that the defendants had encroached upon a public road by constructing a compound wall, thereby obstructing the plaintiff's right of access. The trial court partly decreed the suit, directing the defendants to remove the encroachment and restraining them from interfering with the plaintiff's right of way. The appellants, being government authorities, contended that the trial court erred in decreeing the suit. The High Court, after hearing the parties, found that the appeal was devoid of merit and dismissed it, upholding the trial court's decree. The court noted that the findings of fact by the trial court were based on evidence and were not perverse, and no substantial question of law arose for consideration. The appeal was dismissed at the admission stage itself.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Regular First Appeal - Section 96 CPC - Challenge to decree - Appeal against judgment and decree in suit for mandatory and permanent injunction - Held that the appeal is devoid of merit and dismissed (Para 1-3).
B) Property Law - Encroachment on Public Road - Mandatory Injunction - Plaintiff claimed defendants encroached upon a public road by constructing a compound wall - Trial Court decreed suit directing removal of encroachment - Held that the findings of fact by trial court are based on evidence and not perverse (Para 2-3).
C) Civil Procedure - Appeal - Dismissal - No substantial question of law - Appeal dismissed at admission stage - Held that no interference is called for (Para 3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court was justified in decreeing the suit for mandatory injunction and permanent injunction directing the defendants to remove the alleged encroachment and restraining them from interfering with the plaintiff's right of way.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and decree dated 10.10.2018 passed in O.S.No.9/2016 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bagalkot, is upheld.
Law Points
- Mandatory injunction
- permanent injunction
- encroachment on public road
- burden of proof
- Section 96 CPC
- Order 41 Rule 1 CPC
Case Details
2020 LawText (KAR) (09) 59
RFA No. 100020 of 2019 (INJ-)
S.R. Krishna Kumar, C.M. Poonacha
Sri. Keshava Reddy, AAG along with Sri. Ashok Kattimani, AGA for appellants; Sri. Harsh Desai and Sri. N.L. Batakurki, Advocate for C/R1 for respondent
The District Commissioner, The Assistant Commissioner, The Tahasildar, The Chief Executive Officer, The Executive Engineer, The Assistant Executive Engineer
Shri Chandrakant S/o. Gurulingappa Desai
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Regular First Appeal under Section 96 CPC against judgment and decree in a suit for mandatory injunction and other reliefs.
Remedy Sought
Appellants (defendants) sought to set aside the judgment and decree dated 10.10.2018 passed in O.S.No.9/2016 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bagalkot.
Filing Reason
The appellants challenged the trial court's decree which partly decreed the suit for mandatory injunction and other reliefs filed by the respondent/plaintiff.
Previous Decisions
The trial court partly decreed the suit on 10.10.2018.
Issues
Whether the trial court was justified in decreeing the suit for mandatory injunction and permanent injunction?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellants argued that the trial court erred in decreeing the suit.
Respondent supported the trial court's decree.
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal is devoid of merit and no substantial question of law arises for consideration. The findings of fact by the trial court are based on evidence and are not perverse.
Judgment Excerpts
This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, by the defendants challenging the judgment and decree dated 10.10.2018 passed in O.S.No.9/2016 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bagalkot, whereunder, the suit for mandatory injunction and other reliefs filed by the respondent/plaintiff, has been partly decreed by the Trial Court.
The appeal is devoid of merit and the same is dismissed.
Procedural History
The suit O.S.No.9/2016 was filed by the respondent/plaintiff for mandatory injunction and other reliefs. The trial court partly decreed the suit on 10.10.2018. The defendants filed the present Regular First Appeal under Section 96 CPC on an unspecified date. The appeal was heard and reserved for judgment on 21.08.2025, and judgment was pronounced on 24.09.2025.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 96
