Shaik Reddy Basha vs Kalpavalli Venkataramana Reddy
2022 Latest Caselaw 9517 AP

                HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI
                             MAIN CASE : S.A.No.655 of 2019
                                  PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl.      Date                                  ORDER                               OFFICE
No.                                                                                 NOTE

1.

09.12.2022 SRS,J S.A.No.655 of 2019

Defendants in the suit filed the present second appeal against the judgment and decree, dated 27.06.2017 passed in A.S.No.03 of 2012 on the file of learned V Additional District Judge, Rayachoty reversing the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.28 of 2009 on the file of learned Principal Junior civil Judge, Rayachoty.

Plaintiffs filed O.S.No.28 of 2009 for grant of permanent injunction, restraining the defendant, and his men from encroaching and causing obstruction in the plaint schedule rasta shown as AB1GH in the plaint plan and for costs of the suit.

Trial Court dismissed the suit. Aggrieved by the same, plaintiffs filed appeal and the same was allowed setting aside the findings of the trial Court and granted permanent injunction giving liberty to the defendant to canvass and establish his title by filing a declaration suit if he desires to do so. Aggrieved by the same, the present second appeal is filed by the defendant.

Heard.

Admit.

The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration.

1. Whether in a suit for injunction, filed by the plaintiffs, placing burden on the defendant vitiates the judgment of appellate Court?

2. Whether the plaintiffs having filed suit for injunction proved existence of rastha, by placing evidence?

3. Whether granting of injunction without adjudicating as to whether property of an extent of 0.04¾ cents belonging to the defendant was left for rastha?

______ SRS,J

I.A.No.1 of 2022

Post on 22.12.2022.

______ SRS,J ikn