JUDGMENT :

Plaintiff in the suit filed above second appeal aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 05.07.2022 in A.S.No.100 of 2016 on the file of Special Sessions Judge for SC & ST Cases-cum-XI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, confirming the judgment and decree dated 11.03.2016 in O.S.No.269 of 2007 on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Bheemunipatnam.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties to this judgment are referred to as per their array in plaint.

3. Plaintiff filed the suit O.S.No.269 of 2007 for permanent injunction.

4. In the plaint, it was contended inter-alia that plaintiff is the absolute owner of the land admeasuring 220 square yards in S.No.188/1 of Madhurawada village having purchased the same under a registered sale deed dated 30.12.2002; that vendor of plaintiff got the property under a registered sale deed bearing document No.675 of 2002 from one R. Prabhakar Rao, GPA Holder; that plaintiff constructed two shop rooms within the schedule property in the year 2003; that plaintiff filed C.O.P.No.242 of 2005 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Bheemunipatnam and the counsel for defendant issued reply on 07.10.2005 with false allegations; that in October, 2005 defendant illegally demolished the structures i.e. two shop rooms; that plaintiff filed complaint before Bheemunipatnam police, who in turn admonished the defendant for his illegal and high handed act; that Bheemunipatnam police issued letter dated 23.03.2006 to the MRO for identification of property and its boundaries in order to settle the dispute; while the matter is pending before the MRO, defendant high handedly tried to construct compound wall and the same was resisted and hence, filed the suit for perpetual injunction.

5. Defendant filed written statement and contended inter-alia that mother-in-law of defendant by name Suggu Narasayamma purchased property in S.No.188/1 under Patta No.678 of an extent of Ac.0.05 cents in the year 1977 under a registered document No.1252 of 1977 from V.V.L. Krishna Rao; that Narasayamma executed a registered gift deed in favour of her son Atchiraju in the year 1983; that Atchiraju died on 26.01.1989 leaving behind defendant, Narasayamma, his two daughters and one son as his legal heirs; the schedule property purchased by Narasayamma came into possession and enjoyment of defendant and her family members jointly and they have been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of schedule property; that in the year 2000, defendant started to construct a pucca house in the property; that on 27.11.2000 one Pothina Venkata Ramana @ Potti Ramana and Rudraraju Markendeya Raju and their men tried to interfere with the possession of defendant; that suit O.S.No.387 of 2000 was filed on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Bheemunipatnam seeking permanent injunction and the same was decreed on 13.06.2005; that defendant completed compound wall and two rooms in the property; while constructing the compound wall, defendant left two feet site on the western side and later stopped construction as per Vastu; that defendant demolished the compound wall and at that stage, plaintiff and her husband including Pothina Venkata Ramana and their men threatened the defendant; that on 04.10.2005 plaintiff filed caveat and defendant sent a suitable reply on 17.10.2005; that plaintiff issued paper publication on 25.10.2005 and in response, defendant also issued paper publication on 27.10.2005; that defendant also placed the matter before the Police Commissioner, Visakhapatnam in Spandana programme, who in turn directed the MRO to depute Mandal Surveyor to resolve the problem; that MRO deputed Mandal Surveyor, who surveyed the land basing on documents and also handed over property of schedule property to defendant vide proceeding in L.Dis.No.206/06/A; that defendant obtained approval from GVMC; that as per the plan, defendant started construction of house in schedule property; that on 07.07.2007, defendant dug a well in north-east