JUDGMENT :

M. VENKATA RAMANA, J.

1. The dispute in this second appeal is in respect of a lane described as ABCD in the plaint plan (Ex.A3) of 4 yards wide.

2. The appellant as the plaintiff claimed that in order to reach his property shown as AHKF in the plaint plan from Zilla Parishad road on the south, except this ABCD lane, there is no other access which he has been exclusively enjoying. His further claim is that the site in his occupation included certain portion therein which he had purchased from his brother Sri. Vucha Pitchaiah under the sale deed dated 25.04.1979.

3. The respondents 1 and 2 are in occupation of the property shown as KFPNML in the plaint plan. It is to the south of the property of the appellant. There is a wall shown as KF in the plaint plan separating these two properties. There is also Sri. Rama Temple as per the plaint plan shown as PSRN by the side of the respondents property.

4. The complaint of the appellant is that the respondents 1 and 2 without any manner of right encroached upon ABCD lane, who had obtained sale deeds in respect of their site showing excessive area than what was available on the ground and after filing the suit they also constructed a th