Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
Bussa Narayana, S/o. Pedda Venkataiah – Appellant
Versus
Muda Raja Venkateswarlu (Died) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO, J.
This second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (“C.P.C.” for short) is filed aggrieved against the Judgment and decree, dated 22.02.2019 in A.S.No.63 of 2015, on the file of learned VI Additional District Judge, Markapur, confirming the Judgment and decree, dated 04.06.2012 in O.S.No.204 of 2000, on the file of learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Giddalur.
2. The appellant herein is the defendant, the respondents 1 to 5 herein are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.204 of 2000, on the file of learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Giddalur.
3. The 1st plaintiff initiated action in O.S.No.204 of 2000, on the file of learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Giddalur, with a prayer for permanent injunction restraining the defendant not to disturb the peaceful possession and enjoyment of plaintiff in plaint schedule land and for costs of the suit.
During the pendency of the suit, the 1st plaintiff died and his legal representatives were brought on record as plaintiffs 2 to 5.
4. The trial Court decreed the suit in O.S.No.204 of 2000, on the file of learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Giddalur. Felt aggrieved of the same, the defendant in the
In disputes involving conflicting title claims, a suit for permanent injunction is not maintainable without a concurrent declaration of title, reaffirmed by the necessity of evidencing lawful possess....
The suit for injunction is not maintainable when the title of the plaintiff is under a cloud, requiring a declaration of title for proper adjudication.
Possession on the date of filing a suit is essential for granting a permanent injunction; the First Appellate Court findings on possession were upheld as correct.
In a suit for permanent injunction, if the plaintiff establishes title, a reasonable presumption of lawful possession can be drawn. The defendant's challenge to the title must be examined to determin....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a plaintiff cannot claim injunction against the true owner without lawful possession and title.
In injunction suits, the plaintiff must establish possession and title; revenue records are not conclusive proof of ownership.
The court affirmed that in seeking an injunction over immovable property, examination of title is necessary if challenged by the opposing party.
Possession follows title; entries in revenue records do not confer ownership. A suit for injunction is maintainable without seeking declaration of title when possession is established.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
