THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN
SECOND APPEAL No.271 of 2019
JUDGMENT:
The present Second Appeal arises against the judgment dated 30.01.2019 in A.S.No.36 of 2015 on the file of the Court of the XVI Additional District & Sessions Judge at Nandigama, Krishna District by confirming the decree and the judgment dated 01.06.2015 in O.S.No.145 of 2007 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge at Nandigama, Krishna District.
2. The appellant herein is the plaintiff in the suit and the appellant before the lower appellate Court. The respondents herein are the defendants in the suit and the respondents before the lower appellate Court.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.
4. The suit in O.S.No.145 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge at Nandigama was filed for permanent injunction against the defendants, which was contested by the defendants before the trial Court. The trial Court framed the issues, which are reflected in the para-5 of the judgment of the trial Court, as under:
(1) Whether the plaint schedule property is the land belonging to R&B Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh?2
(2) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for permanent injunction against the defendants over the plaint schedule property as prayed for ?
(3) To what relief?
5. On considering the evidence and the pleadings before it, the trial Court has come to a conclusion that the plaintiff failed to establish his settled lawful possession over the suit schedule property as on the date of the filing of the suit. Accordingly, the suit was dismissed with no costs. Aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff preferred an appeal before the lower appellate Court in A.S.No.36 of 2015. The lower appellate Court while considering the appeal before it, framed an issue that whether the plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property as on the date of the filing of the suit? After considering the case on merits, the lower appellate Court also came to a conclusion that the plaintiff/appellant could not establish the possession over the suit schedule property as on the date of the filing of the suit. Accordingly, lower appellate Court has dismissed the appeal confirming the judgment of the trial Court. Against which, the plaintiff/appellant preferred this second appeal before this Court on the ground that the lower appellate Court has not framed the issue before considering the appeal finally.
3
6. As stated supra, the said contention is not correct and the trial Court as well as the lower appellate Court considered the case on merits by framing the issues and dismissed the relief sought for by the plaintiff/appellant herein.
7. Hence, I see no reason to interfere with the judgments of the Courts below as there is no substantial question of law that arise for consideration in the second appeal and, as such, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
8. Accordingly, the Second Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.
_______________________ B.KRISHNA MOHAN, J.
Date : 06-01-2021 Gvl 4 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN SECOND APPEAL No.271 of 2019 Date : 06-01-2021 5 Gvl