IMPORTANT POINT
A party seeking a temporary injunction must establish lawful possession, a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury.

ORDER :

1. The Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, has been filed aggrieved by the Order dated 21.04.2022 passed in C.M.A. No. 8 of 2018 on the file of the VII Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam.

2. The respondent/plaintiff filed Original Suit No. 1193 of 2017 on the file of the VI Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam seeking permanent injunction restraining the petitioner/defendant and his men from interfering with possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by respondent/plaintiff. The respondent/plaintiff filed I.A. No. 970 of 2017 in the said suit seeking temporary injunction pending disposal of the suit.

3. The brief facts are that the respondent/plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit stating that plaint schedule property is his absolute property, devolved from his ancestors. For the last 20 years, the plaintiff and his family are residing in the said property constructing two ACC sheets roofed houses on a basement. D. Nos. 11-3-62/2 and 11-3-62/3 and Assessment Nos. 1089008597 and 1089002285 were given by the Municipality. Respondent/plaintiff has been paying taxes to the municipality. Electrical service connection SC No. 11252-8B005 003822 has been provided to the same. He constructed an RCC slabbed Sri Hanuman temple at the northern side of the house in the schedule property and is offering poojas regularly.

In 2009, when A. Pydayya tried to trespass into the schedule property, respondent/plaintiff filed O.S. No. 22 of 2009 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Bheemunipatnam and the said suit was decreed vide judgment dated 19.03.2009. Surveyor appointed by the Tahsildar, after survey, gave endorsement dated 19.11.2011 stating that respondent/ plaintiff is in possession of the schedule property, and as per the endorsement, the respondent/plaintiff is in possession of 315 square yards of land in T.S. No. 162, Ward No. 23 of Bheemunipatnam village. When the respondent/plaintiff made constructions in the plaint schedule property by removing old ACC sheets of D. No. 11-3-62/3 for constructing an RCC slabbed house on the old foundation, on 25.10.2017, the petitioner/defendant, without any manner of right whatsoever, tried to trespass into by obstructing the construction by the respondent/plaintiff. But, the illegal acts were resisted by the respondent/plaintiff and his neighbours. On 07.11.2017, again, the petitioner/defendant along with his henchmen tried to trespass into the plaint schedule property and created nuisance, but the said illegal acts were resisted by the respondent/plaintiff. Hence, the suit for permanent injunction and the I.A. seeking temporary injunction.

4. The petitioner/defendant filed counter denying the case of the respondent/plaintiff and stating inter alia that Hanuman Temple is situated in the extreme north near municipal road, and it is not a temple but is a recent temporary construction to raise sentiments. An extent of 300 to 400 square yards is situated in between the alleged temple and the two houses. Company is the absolute owner of the property. No survey, as averred in the petition, took place. No schedule is attached to the alleged endorsement dated 19.11.2011, of the Tahsildar. Plaint schedule as described does not exist on ground. The two houses mentioned in the schedule are situated to the east of the property of the company. The houses, one in an extent of 130 square yards and another in an extent of 102 square yards, are facing opposite to each other and separated by rasta left by the company while constructing compound wall to its property. The plaintiff illegally occupied that site recently and constructed those two temporary structures.

Originally, the land in T.D. No. 162 belonged to Maha Rajah of Vizianagaram. In a partition among his legal heirs, the property in T.S. No. 162 fell to the share of Pusapati Alak Gajapathi Raju S/o P.V.G. Raju. He entered into an agreement with the company M/s. Bheemili Builders Private Limited f