Plaint

AMENDED PLAINT
IN THE COURT OF THE CITY CIVIL JUDGE AT BANGALORE

O.S. No. 7545 OF 2008
BETWEEN:
CHANDRAMMA
W/o. Late Rangappa
Aged about 62 years
No.2514, 7th Main, 9th Cross,
RPC Layout, Hampinagar
Bangalore 560 040
...PLAINTIFF
AND:
1. THE COMMISSIONER
Bangalore Development Authority
Bangalore.
2. Smt.Sharadamma,
W/o Sanjeevaiah,
Aged 65 years,
Residing at No.127,
Kalyan Co-operative Housing Society,
7th Main, Vijayanagar,
Bangalore 560 040.
....DEFENDANTS
MEMORANDUM OF PLAINT UNDER ORDER VII RULE 1 OF THE CODE

OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
The Plaintiff submits as under:-
1. The address of the parties for the purposes of service of notice, issue
of suit summons and other process from this Honble Court are
correctly set out in the above cause title. The address of the Plaintiff is
that of his counsels M/s. LEX NEXUS, Advocates, No.21/1, 1 st Cross,
Yamuna Bai Road, Madhava Nagar, Bangalore 560 001.
2. An extent of 300 sq. Ft., situated on the 9 th Cross, 7th Main, RPC Layout,
Vijayanagar, Bangalore was the property of the BDA. A small piece of
land was unoccupied and vacant. Sometime during March 1980, the
Plaintiff had entered upon the said property and had put up a small
hutment, as she was then doing some coolie work in a nearby vicinity.
Though she had entered upon the property and had put up a hutment,
it was not objected to or protested by the Defendant or any of its
officers.
3. The Plaintiff continued to reside therein along with her family and
slowly she had converted the hutment into a asbestos roof shed and by
making timely alterations and additions. By 1992, the Plaintiff had put
up a full fledged residential house.
Right from the year 1980 up to
1992,
uninterrupted
the
Plaintiff
continued
in
and
continuous
possession exercising acts of ownership in occupying the property and

it was to the full knowledge of the Defendant.
4. The Plaintiffs son had applied for the electricity connection in the year
1992 and secured electricity connection and she has also secured
water connection for the said property. The Plaintiff has been enjoying
these amenities in exercise of her acts of ownership in respect of the
said property.
5. The Plaintiff has continued to be in possession of the said property and
the said property came to be assigned with Municipal No.2514, some
time during the year 1992-93 and the property is presently recognized
by the Municipal No.2514, situated at 9th Cross, 7th Main, ward No. 34,
Hampi Nagar, Bangalore 40, which property is more fully described in
the schedule hereunder and hereinafter referred to as the Schedule
Property.
6. The Plaintiff was informed sometime during the year 1989 that the BDA
had undertaken to regularize all possession held unauthorizedly and
therefore, the Plaintiff had made an application on 25.11.1989. From

the date of the endorsement, BDA is aware of the occupation of the
Plaintiff of the Schedule Property. The Plaintiff has continued to be in
possession thereof
by exercising acts of ownership in putting up a
residential construction, securing water connection and electricity

connection
thereto.
The
Plaintiff
had
attempted
to
pay
the
assessments, but the BBMP had not accepted the same only on the
ground that the khatha was not standing in the name of the Plaintiff
and therefore, BBMP cannot collect the assessments from her.
7. The name of the Plaintiff has been included in the voters list at least
since 1995. The Plaintiff knew that the Defendant is the owner of the
Schedule Property and she had entered upon the Schedule Property in
the year 1980 (March 1980) and continued in possession thereof by
exercising acts of ownership hostile to the interest of the Defendant
and to the knowledge of the Defendant. The Plaintiff has now been in
uninterrupted possession of the Schedule Property for over 28 years.
The Plaintiff has therefore perfected her title, by adverse possession
as against the Defendant.
When such being the situation, on
05.07.2008, the officials of the Defendant had held out that the
property will be demolished.
At that stage, the Plaintiff had
approached this Honble Court. In fact after the Plaintiff had perfected
her title by adverse possession by her continuous and uninterrupted
possession, exercising acts of ownership, hostile to the interest and
knowledge of the Defendant and had also attempted to pay the
assessment.
Though the Plaintiff had asked for regularization of
unauthorised construction, the Defendant has not considered the

same, but on the other hand is fully aware of the continuous and
uninterrupted possession of the Plaintiff and her hostile acts of
ownership. The Defendant has therefore lost its right in respect of the
Schedule Property and the Plaintiff has become the absolute owner by
perfecting her title to the Schedule Property by adverse possession.
8. The cause of action for the suit arose during March 1980 when the
Plaintiff entered upon the Schedule Property and has continued in
possession by exercising acts of ownership hostile to the interest and
knowledge of the Defendant and upon expiry of statutory period, upon
which the Plaintiff has perfected her title by adverse possession and on
05.07.2008, when the Defendant has made attempts to demolish the
existing constructions in the Schedule Property, within the jurisdiction
of this Honble Court.
9. The suit is valued and the court fee is paid as detailed in the
accompanying valuation slip.
10.
The Plaintiff has not filed any other suit, seeking the same relief
or the cause of
action.
However, the Plaintiff had filed a suit for
injunction to protect her possession in O.S.No. 4445/2008 and has filed

all original documents in the said suit.
However in view of urgency
copy of documents is produced in this suit.

11.
Other than the said suit, the Plaintiff has not filed any other suit
either in respect of the cause of action or the subject matter before

this Honble Court.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff most humbly prays that this Honble Court
be pleased to pass a judgment and decree against the Defendant.
a. Declaring that the Plaintiff has acquired title to the Schedule
Property by adverse possession and consequently declaring that the
Plaintiff is the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the
Schedule Property.
b. Grant perpetual injunction against the Defendant, their officials or
anybody claiming right through or under them from interfering with
the Plaintiff peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Schedule

Property.
c. Award costs of the Suit.
d. Pass such other orders as may be deemed appropriate under the
circumstances of the case, in the ends of justice.
SCHEDULE
All that piece and parcel of the property bearing site No.2514,
situated at 9th Cross, 7th Main, RPC Layout, Vijayanagar II Stage,
Bangalore -40, measuring East to West 10 + 15/2 and North to
South 25 feet having a residential construction, consisting of one
hall, room, kitchen, bath and toilet with one verandah and provided
with amenities and bounded on:
East by :
West by :
North by :
South by:
Road
Road
Road
Site No.2514/A
ADVOCATE FOR PLAINTIFF
PLAINTIFF
VERIFICATION
I, Chandramma, do hereby verify and declare the contents of the

plaint to be true and correct, to the best of my knowledge,
information and belief.
BANGALORE
DATED :
PLAINTIFF
IN THE COURT OF THE CITY CIVIL JUDGE AT BANGALORE

O.S. No. 7545 OF 2008
BETWEEN:
CHANDRAMMA
...
PLAINTIFF
....
DEFENDANTS
AND:
THE COMMISSIONER
Bangalore Development Authority
And Another.
VERIFYING AFFIDAVIT
I, CHANDRAMMA W/o. Late Rangappa, aged about 62 years, No.2514, 7 th
Main, 9th Cross, RPC Layout, Hampinagar, Bangalore 560 040, do hereby
solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows:
1. I am the plaintiff and conversant with the facts of teh case. Hence, I
am swear to this affidavit.
2. I submit that the averments contained in the accompanying Amended
Plaint from Paras 1 to 11 are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge, information and belief.
Identified by Me.
Deponent.
Advocate.
Bengaluru
Date:
No. of Corrections.
Sworn to before me.

Plaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Plaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Plaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the plaintiff claiming in the suit?

What is the plaintiff claiming in the suit?

What evidence is the plaintiff providing to support the claim of adverse possession?

What evidence is the plaintiff providing to support the claim of adverse possession?

AMENDED PLAINT

IN THE COURT OF THE CITY CIVIL JUDGE AT BANGALORE

MEMORANDUM OF PLAINT UNDER ORDER VII RULE 1 OF THE CODE

The Plaintiff submits as under:-

Right from the year 1980 up to

possession exercising acts of ownership in occupying the property and

therefore, the Plaintiff had made an application on 25.11.1989. From

by exercising acts of ownership in putting up a

residential construction, securing water connection and electricity

When such being the situation, on

At that stage, the Plaintiff had

Though the Plaintiff had asked for regularization of

unauthorised construction, the Defendant has not considered the

However, the Plaintiff had filed a suit for

injunction to protect her possession in O.S.No. 4445/2008 and has filed

However in view of urgency

copy of documents is produced in this suit.

either in respect of the cause of action or the subject matter before

the Plaintiff peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Schedule

ADVOCATE FOR PLAINTIFF

I, Chandramma, do hereby verify and declare the contents of the

IN THE COURT OF THE CITY CIVIL JUDGE AT BANGALORE

Sworn to before me.

You might also like