THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO C.M.A.No.74 of 2011 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice N.V. Ramana) At the interlocutory stage, this appeal is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This appeal is directed against the order dated 03.11.2010 passed by the II Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in I.A.No.2760 of 2010 in O.S.No.447 of 2010. The plaintiff–Indira Seva Sadan Trust (respondent herein) filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant–Scheduled Caste Grave Yard Society (appellant herein) and its men from interfering with its peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. Pending the suit, the plaintiff-Trust filed the above Interlocutory Application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C seeking ad interim injunction contending that one Sangam Laxmi Bai, who formed Indira Seva Sadan Society, created the plaintiff Trust and divested all her properties in favour of the said Trust including Acs.1.02 guntas of land in Sy.No.180, Saidabad. The plaintiff-Trust has given Ac.0.17 guntas from out of the said Ac.1.02 guntas of land to the defendant Society for using the same as burial ground. The plaintiff Trust constructed a compound wall around the suit schedule property. While so, the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation has issued notice dated 29.05.2010 to remove the unauthroised construction and thereafter demolished the compound wall on the northern side of the suit schedule property at the instance of the defendant Society. As the defendant Society was trying to encroach the suit schedule property, the plaintiff filed the suit along with the present I.A. The defendant Society contested the I.A by filing a counter-affidavit denying the allegations made by the plaintiff Trust and stating that the entire suit schedule property is part and parcel of the graveyard. Though none was examined on behalf of the parties, Exs.P.1 to P.22 were marked on behalf of the plaintiff Trust and Exs.R.1 to R.8 were marked on behalf of the defendant Society. The Court below, after considering the entire material available on record, allowed the I.A granting ad interim injunction. Hence, this appeal by the defendant Society. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the respondent. A perusal of the impugned order discloses that Smt.Sangam Laxmi Bai was having Ac.12.02 guntas of land in Sy.No.180 of Saidabad and she endowed the scheduled property along with other properties to the plaintiff-Trust. All the documents would show incidental title in favour of said Laxmi Bai, which was subsequently devolved upon the plaintiff-Trust. Even though the defendant Society is claiming possession over the entire Ac.1.20 guntas of land, he had not produced any evidence to prove the same, except photographs under Exs.R.1 to R.8. As per Ex.P.16-report and plan prepared by the Mandal Revenue Officer, the graveyard is confined only to the extent of Ac.0.20 guntas of land in Sy.No.180. Since the plaintiff-Trust is having title to the remaining Ac.1.00 guntas of land, which is a vacant land, and there is no evidence as to who is in possession of the said land, it can safely be inferred that prima facie the plaintiff Trust is in possession of the schedule property. In view of the same, the discretion exercised by the Court below in allowing the I.A granting ad interim injunction does not call for any interference by this Court. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is accordingly dismissed. However, the Court below is directed to expedite the hearing of the suit. There shall be no order as to costs. N.V. RAMANA, J K.S. APPA RAO, J Date: 21.02.2011 va