The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of evidence of possession and title in a suit for permanent injunction, the principles of granting preventive relief and perpetual injunction, and the requirement to establish fraud and fabrication alleged by the defendants.

JUDGMENT :

1. S.A.No.1235 of 2017 under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code is filed by defendant No.1 in the suit.

2. S.A.No.1193 of 2017 under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code is filed by defendant No.2 in the suit.

3. In both the Courts below, they suffered decree of permanent injunction which was granted in favour of plaintiff. Respondent No.1 in both the S.A.No.1193 of 2017 and S.A.No.1235 of 2017 is the plaintiff in the suit. Both the appeals arose out of the same suit and are heard together and therefore they are disposed of together by this common judgment.

4. O.S.No.82 of 2014 was a suit for permanent injunction filed by plaintiff as against Defendant Nos.1 and 2. After due trial learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati by the judgment dated 13.10.2016 decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff and thereby granted permanent injunction against both the defendants.

5. Aggrieved by that each of the defendants filed separate appeals. First defendant filed A.S.No.152 of 2016. Second defendant filed A.S.No.153 of 2016. Both the appeals were considered by learned X Additional District Judge, Tirupati and by a common judgment dated 06.06.2017, he dismissed both the appeals and thereby confirmed the judgment of the learned trial Court.

6. It is as against that, the first defendant filed S.A.No.1235 of 2017 challenging the judgment and decree in A.S.No.152 of 2016. The second defendant filed S.A.No.1193 of 2017 challenging the judgment and decree in A.S.No.153 of 2016.

7. Learned counsel on both sides submitted arguments before admission of these two second appeals.

8. It is for the appellants to show to the Court the substantial questions of law on which the second appeals merit admission. To appreciate the submissions of learned counsel on both sides the legal proceedings that unfurled before the Courts below are required to be noticed.

9. Property in dispute is Ac.0.16.4 cents of land in S.No.375/2 situated in Avilala Revenue village, Tirupati Sub Division, Balaji Registration District, Chittoor District. Definite boundaries on all the four sides are given for this property in the schedule that is appended to the plaint. Plaintiff filed the suit alleging that he has been in possession and enjoyment of the property and both the defendants with a view to create unnecessary litigation and with a view to encroach upon this property were making attempts to dis-possess him and demanding to sell the property but it was refused by the plaintiff. It is also alleged that he came to own and possess the property by virtue of a registered sale deed dated 24.02.2006. According to him, having purchased this property he constructed a compound wall by spending amount. It is averred that entries in the revenue records were mutated in his favour. To protect his possession from the defendants he laid the suit for permanent injunction.

10. Each of the defendants filed their separate written statements before the trial court. In the written statement of Defendant No.1 a separate schedule of the property was furnished stating that he purchased the property under registered sale deeds dated 07.05.2003 and the property he purchased is Plot Nos.96 and 97. Since then he has been in possession and enjoyment of it. He raised compound wall around this property. Plaintiff has nothing to do with this property and he has come to the Court with fabricated and created documents and he sought for dismissal of the suit.

11. Second defendant in her written statement stated that she purchased Plot No.98 under registered sale deed dated 21.07.2003 and she has been in possession and enjoyment of it and the plaintiff came to the Court with fraudulent documents and plaintiff has no right, title, possession and enjoyment over her property and plaintiff got created all the revenue records which do not bind this defendant. Plaintiff had come to the Court with unclean hands. For those reasons she sought dismissal of the suit.

12. On these rival pleadings, the trial Cour