Lam Dasari Naga Raju vs Lam Swamy Dasu
2021 Latest Caselaw 1197 AP

             HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.KRISHNA MOHAN


                    SECOND APPEAL NO.757 OF 2019


JUDGMENT :

This Second Appeal arises against the Judgment and Decree

in A.S. No.35 of 2015 on the file of the Court of X Additional

District Judge, Gurazala dated 12.11.2018 confirming the

Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.166 of 2008 on the file of the

Court of Junior Civil Judge, Piduguralla dated 31.03.2015.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.

3. The appellant herein is the appellant in the first appeal and

the second defendant in the suit. The first respondent herein is

the first respondent in the first appeal and plaintiff in the suit.

The second respondent herein is the second respondent in the first

appeal and the first defendant in the suit.

4. The plaintiff initiated action in O.S.No.166 of 2008 on the

file of the Junior Civil Judge, Piduguralla against the defendants

seeking for permanent injunction restraining them from interfering

with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule

property on the ground of leasehold rights given to him by the first

defendant.

~2~

5. Defendant No.1 remained ex parte and Defendant No.2

contested the matter. Upon consideration of the matter on merits

the suit was decreed by the trail Court vide its Judgment dated

31.03.2015. Aggrieved by the same, the second defendant

preferred first appeal in A.S.No.35 of 2015 on the file of the Court

of X Additional District Judge, Gurazala. Upon consideration of the

matter on merits the lower appellate Court dismissed the appeal

by confirming the Judgment and Decree of the trial Court vide its

Judgment dated 12.11.2018. Assailing the same, the second

defendant came in Second Appeal before this Court. But it is

submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the

leasehold rights are also expired on 18.11.2017 and the Defendant

No.2 is claiming ownership of the property/suit schedule property

which is in possession of the plaintiff herein.

6. In view of the above said reasons, the appellant herein is

entitled for claiming the relief of recovery of possession under law

by taking necessary steps before the lower appellate Court and in

such case the said Court shall consider the same in accordance

with law. Since there is no substantial question of law in this

appeal, the Second Appeal is dismissed.

7. Accordingly, the Second Appeal is dismissed and no costs.

~3~

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending

in the Second Appeal, shall stand closed.

_______________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

Date: 26-02-2021.

Yvk.

~4~

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

SECOND APPEAL NO.258 of 2018

Dated: 17.02.2021

Yvk