The Second Appellate Court disposed of an appeal filed by appellants challenging a concurrent finding that the Trial Court and First Appellate Court failed to grant consequential relief for removal of mud filled in the suit land, noting that their own 2017 order was complied with.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
�����������������������
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 100416 OF 2015 (INJ)
BETWEEN:
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. C V ANGADI, ADVOCATE)
�����������������������
AND:
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. S V YAJI, ADVOCATE)
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC 1908, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.01.2015 PASSED IN R.A.NO.10/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KARWAR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL, AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 02.07.2013 AND THE DECREE PASSED IN O.S.NO.12/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) KARWAR, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.
������������������������������������������� �����������������������������������
�����������������������
JUDGMENT
the judgment and order dated 23.01.2015 passed in R.A.No.10/2013 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Karwar (hereinafter referred to as ‘the first appellate Court’), in and by which while allowing appeal in part, the judgment and decree dated 02.07.2013 passed in O.S.No.12/2005 on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Karwar (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Trial Court’) was modified and the defendant and its representatives were permanently restrained from putting up any construction of road in the suit land bearing Sy.No.952/01 of Chittakula village.
�����������������������
directed the Chief Executive Officer of Zilla Panchayat within whose jurisdiction the respondent’s Gram Panchayat is situated, to take appropriate action to remove mud and initiate action against Viresh Naikar, for recovery of the cost incurred for removing mud from the land of the appellants. It was further directed to the Secretary to ensure removal of mud within two weeks from the date of the said order.
�����������������������
Naik - Panchayat Development Officer - the deponent to the Affidavit who is also personally present and the same is taken on record.
����� ������
KGK
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Ashok S/o. Sadashiv Rane
Suresh S/o. Sadashiv Rane
Ravindra S/o. Sadashiv Rane
Suhas S/o. Sadashiv Rane
The Secretary Gram Panchayat Chittakula Village Sadashivagad
M.G.S. Kamal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
