In a suit for permanent injunction, the plaintiff must prove possession of the property as of the date of filing; failure to do so results in dismissal.

JUDGMENT:

The appellant herein (connected with O.S.No.162 of 2009 of Principal Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Kakinada) is the plaintiff in O.S.No.162 of 2009 and the respondent herein is the defendant in the said suit. The defendant herein filed another suit vide O.S.No.239 of 2009 against the plaintiff herein. The learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada, clubbed both the suits and tried together and passed a common judgment against which, A.S.Nos.105 and 112 of 2012 are filed by the respective plaintiffs in both the suits and both these appeals were dismissed by confirming the judgment of the trial Court by the IV Additional District Judge, Kakinada, by passing common judgment dated 07-02-2020. Aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.162 of 2009 (connected with A.S.No.105 of 2015), this second appeal is preferred by the plaintiff. No second appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.239 of 2009 (connected with A.S.No.112 of 2015).

2. The case of the plaintiff as narrated in the plaint, in brief, is as follows:

It is pleaded that item No.1 of plaint schedule property i.e. plot bearing No.49 was purchased by one N. Sri Rama Sastry from the Postal Employees’ Cooperative Building Society under a registered sale deed dated 07-4-1994 and he sold the same to the plaintiff under a registered sale deed dated 10-6-2008. One Smt. B. Nagamani purchased item No.2 of plaint schedule property i.e. plot bearing No.37 from the Society on 10-4-1990 and in turn, she sold the same to the plaintiff under a registered sale deed dated 16-02-2009. It is further pleaded that the defendant has got an agricultural land towards eastern side of the plaint schedule property and that the defendant and his henchmen are openly proclaiming that he will enter into the plaint schedule property and thus the suit is filed.

3. Brief averments in the written statement filed by the defendant are as follows:

It is contended that on 20-4-1962, the defendant’s father purchased an extent of Ac.4-84 cents of land in Old Survey No.102 (New Survey No.111) and an extent of Ac.0-38 cents of land in Old Survey No.103 (New Survey No.112) and other property by a registered sale deed bearing document No.1793/1962 on 20-4-1962 from one Vagu Radha Krishna Murthy and others and he was put in possession and enjoyment of the same with absolute rights. It is further contended that the defendant’s father orally partitioned the properties and the same was reduced into writing on 08-11-1982 and a partition list was prepared in between the defendant and his family members and landed properties were jointly fell to the share of the defendant and his brother P. Venkata Ramana. The defendant urged before the Court to dismiss the suit with costs.

4. Based upon the pleadings of both the parties, the trial Court framed the following issues for trial in O.S.No.162 of 2009:

(1) Whether the sale deeds dated 10-6-2008 and 16-02-2009 are true and valid ?

(2) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for permanent injunction as prayed for ? and

(3) To what relief ?

5. During the course of trial, on behalf of the plaintiff, P.Ws.1 to 7 are examined and Exs.A-1 to A-5 are marked. On behalf of the defendant, D.Ws.1 and 2 are examined and Exs.B-1 and B-10 are marked. The plaintiff also examined Advocate Commissioner as C.W.1 and Ex.C-1 was marked through Advocate Commissioner.

6. After completion of the trial and hearing the arguments of both sides, the trial Court dismissed both the suits. Felt aggrieved of the aforesaid common judgment and decrees, A.S.Nos.105 of 2015 and 112 of 2015 are filed and both the appeals were also dismissed by the first appellate Court. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the first appellate Court, the present second appeal is filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No.162 of 2009 (connected with A.S.No.105 of 2015) and no second appeal is filed against the judgment and decree in O.S.No.239 of 2009 (connected with A.S.No.112 of 2015).

7. On he