THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR SECOND APPEAL NO.340 OF 2009 DATED 28TH JULY, 2011 BETWEEN Mohammed Abdul Ghani Shattari-ul-Quadri S/o Late SDoffi Shah Mohammed Roshan Ali, Shattari-ul-Quadri, Aged 65 years, Occ.:Retd. Teacher, R/o Raipally (Village) Manoor Mandal, Medak District. …Appellant And Mohammed Akram Ali and others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR SECOND APPEAL NO.340 OF 2009 JUDGMENT: By its concurring Judgment dated 21.02.2007, the lower appellate Court of the Special Judge for trial of offences under SC/ST (POA) Act-cum-V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy, dismissed A.S.No.15 of 2002, confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 31.12.2001 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sangareddy, dismissing the suit, O.S.No.89 of 1994. Aggrieved thereby, the plaintiff in the suit filed the present second appeal. The suit was for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff’s management of the Dargah of Hazarath Soofi Shah Mohd. Roshan Ali Shuttari-ul-Quadri and Khan Khah attached to it situated at Raipally Village in Manoor Mandal of Medak District. Mohd. Roshan Ali, a saintly person, was the founder of the suit Khan Khah at Raipally Village where he used to give religious instructions and teachings to his disciples. He died on 10.11.1986. The Dargah was constructed thereafter. The plaintiff in the suit was his son while the first defendant was his grandson, being the son of the plaintiff’s elder brother. The dispute between them is as to who is Sajjadanasheen of the Dargah. The plaintiff relied upon Exs.A.1 and A.2 will deeds said to have been executed by his father in support of his claim that he was appointed as the Mutawalli of the suit Khan Khah and that, though his elder brother was nominated as Sajjadanasheen, he had no capacity or interest and accordingly he was functioning as the Sajjadanasheen of the Dargah also. On the other hand, the first defendant adduced evidence to show that he was appointed as the Sajjadanasheen by all the mureedas (disciples) of late Mohd. Roshan Ali under Ex.B.21. Significantly, both the plaintiff as well as his brother, the father of the first defendant, also affixed their signatures in Ex.B.21. The Courts below, upon minute consideration of the evidence placed on record, held against the plaintiff and accordingly denied the perpetual injunction sought by him. Though it is contended before this Court that the age of the first defendant makes it improbable that he would have been appointed as Sajjadanasheen of the Dargah, this ground was not raised before the Courts below and no evidence was let in as to the age of the first defendant. The learned counsel for the appellant seeks to place reliance on the age mentioned in the cause title of the suit plaint. However, it is not open to the appellant to enlarge the scope of this appeal by introducing a new ground herein for the very first time. Further, as the suit was one for an injunction simplicitor it was for the appellant/plaintiff to establish before the Courts below that he was functioning as Sajjadanasheen of the suit Dargah and that there was interference by the defendants. Except for the will deeds, the appellant/plaintiff did not produce any other document in support of his claim. Further, the fact that he himself signed in Ex.B.21, whereby the first defendant was appointed as Sajjadanasheen of the Dargah clearly speaks against him. The appellant therefore failed to raise any question of law, much less a substantial one, for entertaining this second appeal. The issue was decided on facts obtaining before the Courts below and does not warrant interference by this Court in second appeal. The second appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J. 28TH JULY, 2011. VGSR/PGS