THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY SECOND APPEAL No.1417 of 2010 JUDGMENT: The father of the appellant and the father of the respondents are brothers. The respondents filed O.S.No.105 of 2000 in the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Kanigiri against the appellant and his brother, by name Bala Nagaiah, for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. They pleaded that in the partition that took place between their father and the father of the appellant, the suit schedule property has fallen to the share of their father. It was also alleged that the family of the appellant sold way Ac.14.60 cents of land in Survey No.141, that has fallen to their share, and thereafter, they started interfering with the possession of the respondents over the suit schedule property. The appellant and his brother on the other hand pleaded that the suit schedule property was acquired by their father subsequent to the partition. The trial Court decreed the suit, through its judgment, dated 23.08.2004. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant filed A.S.No.57 of 2004 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Kandukur. The appeal was dismissed on 20.08.2010. Hence, this second appeal. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. The trial Court framed the following issues for its consideration: (1) Whether the plaintiffs were in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule lands as on the date of suit? (2) Whether the defendants interfered with possession of the plaintiff over suit schedule land? (3) Whether the suit for bare injunction is not maintainable as alleged by the defendants? (4) Whether the valuation of the suit and court-fee paid are correct? (5) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to permanent injunction as prayed for? On behalf of the respondents, Exs.P.Ws.1 to 4 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.14 were filed. On behalf of the appellant, D.Ws.1 to 5 were examined and Exs. B.1 and B.2 were filed. The suit was decreed and in the appeal filed preferred by the appellant, the lower appellate Court framed the following points for its consideration: (1) Whether the appellant/defendant have got absolute right over the item No.1 of the plaint schedule property? (2) Whether the respondents/plaintiffs have proved their title and possession in the entire suit schedule property and if so, whether they are entitled to permanent injunction. On behalf of the appellant, Exs.B.3 and B.4 were filed and the lower appellate Court dismissed the appeal. The respondents rested their claim on the partition, that was effected between their father and father of the appellant. In addition to that, they filed the copies of adangals, cist receipts, pattadar pass books, title deeds etc., in respect of the suit schedule property. They have also filed sale deeds executed by the defendants, marked as ExA.10 to show that the property that has fallen to the share of the father of the appellant was sold away. It is no doubt true that the appellant filed certain documents at the stage of appeal, which were marked as Exs.B.3 and B.4. They are the title deeds and pattadar pass books issued by the revenue authorities. However, those documents do not go into the origin of the title. The suit was for the relief of injunction and what becomes relevant is the possession over the suit schedule property as on the date of the suit. The appellant was not able to demonstrate that he was in possession of the property. On the other hand, there is voluminous documentary and oral evidence to show that the respondents were enjoying the property. The apprehension of the appellant is that the lower appellate Court made certain observations touching upon the title. It is needless to mention that any observation as to tile in the suit for perpetual injunction shall not be treated as final much less as res judicata, in the event of any suit for declaration of title being filed. Therefore, the second appeal is dismissed, leaving it open to the appellant to file a suit for declaration and recovery of possession. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 11.08.2011 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY SECOND APPEAL No.1417 of 2010 Date: 11.08.2011 jsu