( 1 ) HEARD Sri Subrahmanya Reddy, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellants and Sri E. Manohar, the learned Senior counsel for the respondents.

( 2 ) ALL these appeals are directed against the common judgment and decree dated 20-7-2001 passed by the Court of Senior civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District in O. S. Nos. 154, 155 and 156 of 2000. Since the plaint averments in all the three suits and the written statements are similar and under the same set of circumstances and as the defendants are common, all the three appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.

( 3 ) FOR the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as per their array in the original suits.

( 4 ) THE cases of the plaintiffs in all the three suits is that they have purchased about 2,000 sq. yards in Sy. No. 50 of yellareddyguda, Hamlet of Keesara Mandal, rangareddy District under three registered sale deeds dated 22-1-2000,17-1-2000 and 18-1-2000 under Exs. A-9, A-1 and A-8 respectively from defendants 1 and 2 who are the original owners of the property. After the said purchase, plaintiffs spent a considerable amount in developing the land, besides constructing rooms. Defendants 3 to 7 are in no way concerned with the said property. When they tried to interfere with the possession of the plaintiffs, they lodged police complaint, but no action had been taken. Hence, the present suits were filed for perpetual injunction.

( 5 ) DEFENDANTS 1 and 2, who are said to be the original owners, remained ex parte.

( 6 ) FROM the averments in the written statements and as well as in the counter affidavit filed opposing the I. A. filed by the plaintiffs seeking interim injunction, the admitted case of the defendants 3 to 7 is that the 3rd defendant and one A. Laxmareddy purchased a total extent of land admeasuring Acs. 6. 19 guntas in yellareddyguda, Hamlet of Kapra village, keesara Mandal, Rangareddy District under agreement of sale dated 2-8-1980 from the original owner M. Mallareddy and six others, after paying the entire sale consideration. Since then 3rd defendant and the husband of the. 4th defendant have been in possession and enjoyment of the said property. 4th defendant is the wife of said laxmareddy, who predeceased. During the lifetime of the said Laxmareddy, he and the 3rd defendant executed a General Power of attorney in favour of the 5th defendant. Subsequent to the death of Laxmareddy, 3rd and 4th defendants executed another general Power of Attorney in favour of the 5th defendant. Even during the life time of laxmareddy, an application was made by him along with 3rd defendant under Sec. 5-A of A. P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass books Act, 1971 (for short, ror Act ) before mandal Revenue Officer, Keesar to make necessary entries in the revenue records. After conducting an enquiry, the said sale was regularized and the names of 3rd defendant and Laxmareddy were ordered to be recorded in the revenue records. Subsequent to the death of Laxmareddy, his wife, who is the 4th defendant along with the 3rd defendant made an application for the issuance of the pattadar pass books and accordingly pattadar pass books and title deeds were issued. The 5th defendant has been managing the property on behalf of the 3rd and 4th defendants. No lay out was sanctioned as pleaded by the plaintiffs and that the land continued as agricultural land. The G. P. A. , on the basis of which sale deeds were executed was cancelled on 20-10-1992 and, therefore, the sale deeds relied on by the plaintiffs are null and void. These defendants also filed suit in O. S. No. 216/1998 on the file of Principal Senior civil Judge, Rangareddy District against defendants 1 and 2 and one Chandralekha seeking injunction. In the said suit an interim order was passed in their favour in respect of above said property, except to an extent of 1,473 sq. yards. The order passed in the interlocutory application is marked as ex. A-7. Further, as the title of defendants 3 an