THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 2823 of 2011 Dated: 18-11-2011 Oral Order: The revision petitioners are the appellants in A.S.No. 1 of 2011 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka; an appeal preferred against the judgment and decree in a suit filed by them for a permanent injunction in respect of the suit schedule property, which was dismissed by the trial Court. The trial Court found that the petitioners failed to prove either their possession or title over the A & B schedule property as on the date of filing of the suit. Two years after preferring the appeal, the revision petitioners filed I.A.No. 138 of 2011 under Order 19 Rule 1 CPC seeking marking of certain documents as Exs.A31 to A38, as additional evidence. Among the documents sought to be marked as additional evidence is D-form patta allotment issued in favour of the plaintiffs father one Konathala Appanna in 1999. Though the defendants/respondents herein contested the revision petitioners/plaintiffs claim of title to the property, what is essential and substantive in a suit for injunction is possession of the plaintiffs as on the date of institution of the suit. Elaborate analysis and adjudication of title to the property, is not warranted, as in a suit for declaration of title. The Court below also found that the petitioner did not exhibit due diligence in filing the application for additional evidence. This Court discerns no error in the order of the Court below, warranting supervisory interference under Article 227 of the Constitution. There are no merits. The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. ________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J 18th November, 2011. GRR