V. BHASKARA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE 1st defendant is the appellant. The respondent filed the suit for a declaration that the ABCD lane is carved out for the use of the owners of the plots EFGHIJKL to reach the street on the northern side of the plots and for use of their men, cattle, carts and other allied purposes. In the sale-deed of D-l for the plots G and K it was left out by the plaintiff s father for his use. Therefore D-1 is bound by the said "recitals. As a matter of fact, even prior to 1913 and subsequently also the plaintiff was taking his carts and was using it for his men and cattle from his plots, E. F. L. , through the galli ABCD. In June, 73 the 1st defendant carted earth in a portion of the galli east of plot G causing obstruction to the plaintiff to use the said galli and in spite of protests the obstruction was not removed. The plaintiff sent a notice to the 1st defendant, to which a false reply dt. 6-7-73 was given. Hence the suit.

( 2 ) THE 1 st defendant-appellant filed a written statement contending that it is not true that the father of the 1st defendant purchased J plot. It is also denied that ABCD is a galli and carved out for use of the owners of plots EFGHIJKL to reach the street on the north. It is stated that the site up to the southern boundary of G Plot from northern bazar is absolute property of the defendant and that neither the plaintiff nor his predecessorsin-title have ever used the site ABCD as a galli for ingress and egress. The mere wrong description in the sale-deed of the 1st defendant s father that there is a galli to the cast of plot G is sought to be taken advantage of. Neither the plaintiff nor his predecessors in title were taking their carts from efl through the galli ABCD, Every year the 1st defendant never questioned the same at any time. It is further stated that the plaintiff has got entrance to the eastern and southern bazars from his site and that he has been taking men, cattle and carts from his site into the cast, south and western panchayat bazars, from his site. The suit, therefore, is liable to be dismissed with costs.

( 3 ) DEFENDANTS 2 and 3 remained ex-parte.

( 4 ) THE trial Court framed the necessary issues and during the trial the plaintiff examined PWs. 1 to 4 and market Exs. A-1 to A-13 while the defendant examined DWs. 1 and 2 and marked Exs. B-1 to B-9.

( 5 ) AFTER considering the entire oral and documentary evidence the trial Court held (i) the plaintiff is not having any right in the suit passage abcd, (ii) ABCD is not carved out as a galli for ingress and egress of men, cattle, etc. , from plots E, F and L, and (iii) as the 1st defendant himself is enjoying the suit passage upto the southern boundary of plots K and G from a long time prior to the suit, he acquired title by adverse possession. All the issues have been held accordingly against the plaintiff and the suit was dismissed.

( 6 ) AGAINST the judgment and decree, the plaintiff preferred and appeal. Pending the appeal, the plaintiff filed LA. 1070/81 to receive some more documents as additional evidence. The lower Court received those documents and marked them as Exs. A-l 4 to A-l 7. The plaintiff was also permitted to amend the relief by including a prayer to grant mandatory injunction to remove the obstruction in the ABCD galli. It is also brought to the notice of this court that the petition, LA. 666/81 filed by the 1st defendant to receive some documents as additional evidence was rejected. The klower appellate; Court holding that the plaintiff was using the call abcd allowed the appeal by reversing the judgment and decree of the trial court. Thus the suit stood decreed as prayed for.

( 7 ) AGGRIEVED by the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court, the present second appeal is filed by the 1st defendant.

( 8 ) THE learned counsel, Sri Raja Rao, appearing for the appellant contended that (i) the interpretation of the documents, Exs. A-1 to A-17 and b-l to B-9 given by the lower appellate Court

Click Here to Read the rest of this document