Alla Nirmalamma vs Machireddy Nagireddy
2022 Latest Caselaw 1609 AP

               HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI
                           MAIN CASE NO.: S.A.No.525 of 2021

                                    PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl.     Date                                      ORDER                                   OFFICE
No.                                                                                        NOTE

9.    01.04.2022   SRS,J
                                        S.A.No.525 of 2021

                         This second appeal is filed by defendant No.3 against
                   the judgment and decree, dated 29.05.2020 passed in
                   A.S.No.14 of 2018 on the file of learned IV Additional District
                   Judge, Nellore District, whereby the first appellate Court
                   dismissed the appeal confirming the judgment and decree,
                   dated 30.10.2017 passed in O.S.No.465 of 2014 on the file of
                   learned III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Nellore District.

                         O.S.No.465 of 2014 was filed by respondent Nos.1 and

2 herein seeking permanent injunction against the appellant and respondent Nos.3 and 4 herein restraining them and their men from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of respondent Nos.1 and 2 in respect of the suit schedule property. The trial Court by judgment, dated 30.10.2017 has decreed the suit on contest, against which the appellant herein i.e. defendant No.3 preferred A.S.No.14 of 2018 on the file of learned IV Additional District Judge, Nellore District and the same was dismissed confirming the judgment and decree of the trial Court. Hence, the second appeal.

Heard. Admit.

The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration.

1. Whether the suit for bare injunction is maintainable without praying for declaration of title of plaint schedule property when there is clear cloud of title in vacant site in view of rival pleadings and further when earlier sale deed is subsisting in favour of appellant without seeking relief of setting aside earlier sale?

2. Whether the finding of Courts below that the appellant is not in possession of the property contrary to Ex.B1 and B18 and DW2 are perverse and against the material on record?

3. Whether both the Courts below misread the report of advocate commissioner Ex.C3 and properly consider the objections of the defendants can it be looked to prove possession of the plaintiff?

I.A.No.2 of 2021

This petition is filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 and Section 151 of CPC with a prayer to grant interim injunction restraining the respondents and their men from alienating or creating any third party interests over the plaint schedule property, pending the second appeal.

Since, the suit itself is filed for injunction and the suit was decreed in favour of respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein i.e. plaintiffs, grant of such relief of injunction restraining the respondents from alienating the plaint schedule property will not arise.

In view of the same, this petition is dismissed.

______ SRS,J

ikn