B. K. SOMASEKHARA, J.

( 1 ) HEARD on merits.

( 2 ) STRICTLY speaking no question of law is involved in this case. The appellants who are the plaintiffs 2 to 4 in O. S. No. 261 of 1986 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Parchur and respondents in A. S. No. 20 of 1995 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Parchur have challenged the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Parchur allowing the appeal filed by the respondents dated 28-2-1997 as against the judgment and decree of the learned Principal District Munsif, Parchur dated 21-3-1991. Reference to the parties in the status they occupied in the first Court would be convenient as plaintiffs and defendants. The plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with their possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property to an extent of ac. 3. 35 cts. described in plaint schedule which they deciphered as Plot No. A in the suit plan. The defendants resisted the suit. A trial was afforded to them where they adduced both oral and documentary evidence to comprise in the ocular testimony of the 1st plaintiff as P. W. I and two other witnesses as per p. Ws. 2

Click Here to Read the rest of this document