You are on page 1of 6

DRAFTING, PLEADING & CONVENYANCE

CONTINUOUS ASSESSMENT I - ASSIGNMENT


DRAFT A PLAINT BASED ON A JUDGMENT

Submitted To- Submitted By-


Mr. Om Prakash Gautam Uradi Vishnu (1150)
Faculty of Law Section- A

IN THE COURT OF THE CITY CIVIL JUDGE AT BANGALORE

O.S. No. OF 2008

Chandramma
W/o. Late Rangappa
Aged about 62 years
No.2514, 7th Main, 9th Cross,
RPC Layout, Hampinagar
Bangalore – 560 040 ...PLAINTIFF

Vs

1. The Commissioner
Bangalore Development Authority
Bangalore- 560 042
2. Smt. Sreelakshmi,
W/o Ramaswamy,
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 Hon’ble 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, 1st Cross, Yamuna Bai Road, Madhava Nagar,
Bangalore – 560 001.
2. An extent of 300 sq. Ft., situated on the 9th 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 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, the Plaintiff continued in
uninterrupted and continuous possession exercising acts of ownership in
occupying the property and it was to the full knowledge of the Defendant.
4. The Plaintiff’s 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, sometime 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, Hampinagar, 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 HDA had
undertaken to regularize all possession held unauthorized and therefore, the
Plaintiff had made an application on 25.11.1989. From the date of the
endorsement, HDA 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 HMP had not accepted the same only on the ground that
the khatha was not standing in the name of the Plaintiff and therefore, HMP
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 Hon’ble 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 Hon’ble 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 Hon’ble Court.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff most humbly prays that this Hon’ble 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 9 th 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 : Road

West by : Road

North by : Road

South by : 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

Chandramma .......PLAINTIFF

Vs

The Commissioner
Bangalore Development Authority
And Another ........DEFENDANTS

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 the 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.

Advocate for the Plaintiff

Bangalore Deponent

Date:

You might also like