G. BIKSHAPATHY, J.

( 1 ) THIS L. P. A. is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned single Judge in C. C. C. A. No. 21 of 1996, dated 21-8-1998 confirming the judgment and decree dated 29-11-1993 in O. S. No. 276 of 1988 on the file of III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated the following are facts of the case: The suit was filed by the plaintiffs seeking declaration of title in respect of land in Sy. No. 234 in Tokatta village, Boinpally Mandal, Secunderabad, admeasuring Ac. 2-33 guntas and for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the same.

( 3 ) AS per the averments in the plaint, it is the case of plaintiffs that one B. V. Prakash Reddy was the owner and pattedar of the agricultural lands in Sy. No. 234 admeasuring Ac. 2-33 guntas in Tokatta village, Boinpally Mandal. The said Prakash Reddy died in the year 1982 leaving behind the first plaintiff-wife and second plaintiff-daughter of the said Prakash Reddy. It is also the case of the plaintiffs that the land was originally leased out to one Achaiah in the year 1950. The tenancy certificate was issued in the name of Achaiah and after the death of Achaiah, his brothers succeeded to the tenancy. However, the ownership continued to rest with the said Prakash Reddy.

( 4 ) WHILE so, the defendants have set up a plea that the suit land forms part of General Land Register Sy. No. 586 classified as A-2 and the plaintiffs tried to interfere and evict the protected tenant. At this stage, the said tenant filed a suit in O. S. No. 1433 of 1980 on the file of V Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for perpetual injunction in respect of the land in question and the same was ultimately dismissed for default. It is also stated that B. V. Prakash Reddy was the owner of the land in question and the plaintiffs continued to be in possession for the last 40 to 50 years and thus, the plaintiffs also alternatively claim title by prescription by way of adverse possession. Therefore, the relief was sought for declaration of title and injunction.

( 5 ) THE suit was resisted by defendant No. 2 stating that B. V. Prakash Reddy was not the owner and pattedar of the suit scheduled land situated in Sy. No. 234 and the suit land forms part of G. L. R. Sy. No. 586 admeasuring Ac. 9-39 guntas which is the absolute property of the Ministry of Defence, Government of India. It is also stated that as per the General Land Register maintained by the second defendant under the Cantonment Land Administration Rules, 1937, the entire land in G. L. R. Sy. No. 586 of which the suit land forms part, is classified as A-2 land and that it was actually used and occupied by the military authorities. In fact, Ac. 7-72 guntas forming part of G. L. R. Sy. No. 586 was the subject-matter of litigation between one Smt. Sharfunnissa Begum and the Military Estates Officer in O. S. No. 421 of 1972 and the said suit was finally dismissed. The present land is part of the land in G. L. R. Sy. No. 586 and, therefore, the plaintiffs have no right to claim ownership in respect of the aforesaid land.

( 6 ) BASING on the respective pleadings, the trial Court framed the followings issues:1. Whether the plaint allegations are true and correct? 2. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for the declaration of title as prayed for? 3. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to a permanent injunction as prayed for? 4. To what relief?

( 7 ) IN support of their claim, the plaintiffs examined PWs-1 to 4 and marked Exs. A-1 to A-33 and Exs. C-1 to C-5 were marked through PW-2. On behalf of defendants, one witness was examined and Exs. B-1 to B-13 were marked. The trial Court considered the issues jointly and held that B. V. Prakash Reddy was the owner and pattedar of the suit schedule property. The trial Court referred to various documents Exs. A-1 to A-13 and recorded such finding, after taking into consideration the plea of defendants that

Click Here to Read the rest of this document