JUDGMENT :

OBUL REDDI, J.

1. These two appeals, I.P.A. 117/19 preferred by the defendants and L.P.A. 147/71 preferred by the plaintiff, arise out of the judgment of our learned brother, A.D.V. Reddy, J., in G.G.C.A. 23/65 confirming the judgment and decree of the trial court in O.S. 30/63 only to the extent of the mandatory injunction against defendants 1 and 2 declining to grant the said injunction against the 3rd defendant, the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. It is for the reason that perpetual and mandatory injunctions are granted against defendants 1 and 2 that they have referred the former appeal and for the reason that mandatory injunction was not granted against the 3rd defendant, the plaintiff has chosen to prefer the other appeal.

2. The learned Advocate-General appearing for the defendants (the parties will be referred to in the inner they were arrayed in the plaint) mainly contended that the Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, Act II of 1956 (Hereinafter referred to as the Act) does not confer any legal right on the owner of a neighbouring or adjacent building and when the Act does not confer any such right, he cannot lay action in a civil court for a mandatory inju