The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the court to address crucial issues such as title and possession in property disputes, as mandated by procedural rules.

JUDGMENT

1. This Second Appeal is filed aggrieved against the Judgment and decree in A.S.No.10 of 2006 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Chirala, dtd. 11/12/2006, allowing the Judgment and decree in O.S.No.69 of 1999 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chirala, dtd. 23/1/2006.

2. The appellant herein is the 2nd defendant, the 1st respondent herein is the 1st defendant and the respondents 2 to 5 herein are the plaintiffs in the Original Suit No.69 of 1999 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chirala.

3. The plaintiffs initiated action in O.S.No.69 of 1999 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chirala, with a prayer to declare that the plaintiffs have got title over the plaint schedule site and for consequential permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their men from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule site, alternatively for the relief of declaration of title over the suit schedule site and for consequential possession of the same by evicting the defendants from the plaint schedule site.

4. The learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chirala, dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs. Felt aggrieved of the same, the unsuccessful plaintiffs in the above said suit filed the aforesaid appeal before the first appellate Court. The learned Senior Civil Judge, Chirala, set aside the judgment of the trial Court in OS.No.69 of 1999, dtd. 23/1/2006, and allowed the appeal. Aggrieved thereby, the unsuccessful 2nd respondent/ 2nd defendant therein approached this Court by way of second appeal.

5. For the sake of convenience, both the parties in the appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in the original suit.

6. The case of the plaintiffs, in brief, as set out in the plaint averments in OS.No.69 of 1999, is as follows:

Smt. Atchula Rama Lakshmi was the step-mother of the plaintiffs. Originally, the plaint schedule site belonged to late Atchula Rama Lakshmi. She died intestate on 28/2/1996 leaving behind the plaintiffs as her legal heirs. Atchula Rama Lakshmi purchased the plaint schedule site under registered sale deed dtd. 17/4/1986 from the ILTD Company Staff Co-operative Industrial Construction Society Ltd. The schedule site is lying vacant. The 1 st plaintiff is residing at Ramagundam and working as teacher in Railway school. The plaintiffs 2 to 4 are residing in Chirala in their marital homes. Late Atchula Rama Lakshmi and her husband Aryakantham were residing in a rental house belonging to the cousin of Aryakantham at Paparaju Thota, Chirala. Whenever the 1stplaintiff and his family visits Chirala, they used to stay with Aryakantham and late Atchula Rama Lakshmi and the plaintiffs used to look after the welfare of their father and step mother. After the death of Aryakantham, plaintiffs' step-mother Atchula Rama Lakshmi fell ill during the last week of February, 1996. The 2ndplaintiff and 4thplaintiff's husband Palepu Subbaramayya took her to the hospital at Chirala and on the advice of doctors they took her to Guntur and from there they took her to Madras for treatment and as late Atchula Rama Lakshmi is suffering with acute blood cancer, in advance stage, she was brought to Chirala from Chennai on the night of 26/2/1996.

ii. The 1stdefendant is the brother of Atchula Rama Lakshmi. He requested the plaintiffs 2 to 4 that he will take Atchula Rama Lakshmi to his house from the rented house and accordingly he shifted her to his house on 27/2/1996. Late Atchula Rama Lakshmi died on 28/2/1996 at 11.00 a.m. At that time the 2ndplaintiff was present at the house of 1st defendant. 1st defendant and his son called the 2nd plaintiff outside the house and had discussion about the death intimation to the relatives and funerals. After the talks she went inside the house and found that there was ink on the left hand of the dead body of Atchula Rama Lakshmi and the 2 ndplaintiff learnt that the 1stdefendant and his men might have obtained the thumb marks of Atchula Rama