THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NRASIMHA REDDY Second Appeal No.1197 of 2011 JUDGMENT: The appellant filed O.S.No.363 of 2005 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ongole against the respondent for the relief of injunction in respect of sunshades that were existing in her property demarcated as ‘ABCD’ in the plaint plan. She stated that after purchasing the land in the year 1957, her husband constructed a house two feet away from the southern compound wall and in that open area, sunshades for the building were provided. According to her, the respondent purchased land in the immediate neighbourhood on the northern side with the dimensions of 15x45 feet and having constructed a building thereon with sunshades, they are trying to meddle with the sunshades provided to her house. The respondent filed a written statement opposing the suit. It was pleaded that the husband of the appellant encroached the property owned by their predecessors in title and had made projections. Reference was made to an earlier litigation in O.S.No.267 of 1977 filed by the predecessor in title of the respondent. The trial Court dismissed the suit through judgment dated 09.11.2009, holding that each party is in possession of their respective plots and there is no encroachment. The appellant filed A.S.No.250 of 1999 in the Court of II Additional District Judge, Ongole. The appeal was dismissed on 19.07.2011. Hence, this second appeal. Heard Sri N.Krishna Murthy, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Nimmagadda Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the respondent. The entire dispute is about the so-called projections said to have been made into a strip of two feet land. While the appellant pleads that the sunshades are projected into an open land within their plot, the respondent contends that the projections are beyond the property of the appellant. On earlier occasion, the predecessor in title of the respondent filed O.S.No.267 of 1977 for the comprehensive relief of declaration of rights, mandatory injunction and removal of encroachment. There is some uncertainty as to the result of the said proceedings. Be that as it may, either for the appellant or for the respondent, the grievance is only about the existing structures. Anyone can meddle with the objectionable structures only by filing a suit for declaration of respective rights and for consequential reliefs. Hence, the second appeal is partly allowed passing a decree in the suit to the effect that in case the respondent has any objection towards any structure, existing on the plot of the appellant herein, he shall be entitled to work out his remedies only by instituting proceedings in the proper Forum or by pursuing the proceedings, if already pending. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 26.12.2011 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NRASIMHA REDDY S.A.No.1197 of 2011 Date: 26.12.2011 JSU