IMPORTANT POINT
In a suit for injunction simplicitor, the Civil Court cannot adjudicate complicated questions of title, and the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is plenary unless expressly ousted by statute or necessary implication.

JUDGMENT :

This Second Appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 16.12.2021 passed in A.S.No.4 of 2019 on the file of the Court of the III Additional District Judge, Adilabad, Asifabad, reversing the judgment and decree dated 28.12.2018 passed in O.S.NO.28 of 2012 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Asifabad.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are arrayed before the trial Court.

3. Brief facts leading to filing of the present Second Appeal are that the plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.28 of 2012 for perpetual injunction before the Senior Civil Judge, Asifabad, in respect of land to an extent of Ac.7-20 cents, in Survey No.168 situated at Malledi Village of Bheemini Mandal, Adilabad District (herein after referred to as ‘the suit land’).

4. It is contended that the plaintiff was owner, pattedar and possessor of the suit land having purchased the same from its original pattedar and owner on 13.07.1994 vide simple sale deed and his name was also mutated in the revenue records through proceedings No.G/1105/2005, dated 21.11.2005 and pattedar pass book and title deed relating to the suit land were also issued in the name of the plaintiff. Since then the plaintiff has been in actual possession and enjoyment of the suit land. It is further contended that the he has been cultivating the land by raising paddy and cotton crops and enjoying the suit land as an absolute owner.

5. It is further contended that on 12.07.2012, the defendant without any manner of right of whatsoever interfered with the suit land and threatened the plaintiff with dire consequences to vacate the suit land and that the defendant is politically influenced person. Therefore, he filed the suit for permanent injunction.

6. The defendant filed written statement denying the contents of the plaint. It is contended that suit land is Inam land and the Government assigned the suit land to the ancestors of the defendant under the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955 ( for short ‘ the Act, 1955’) and prior to that year, ancestors of the defendant enjoyed the suit land as pattedars; that patta was also granted to the ancestors of the defendant long back and that his father never sold the suit land to anybody by virtue of simple sale deed; that the plaintiff fabricated the false documents and got patta pass book and title deed books in his name.

7. It is further contended that the defendant filed application before the District Collector, Adilabad for cancellation of pattedar pass book and title deed as well as the mutation proceedings made in favour of the plaintiff and the District Collector directed the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Asifabad to make an enquiry and to take necessary action. As per the directions of District Collector, Alidabad and the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Asifabad, the Tahasildar, Bheemini has conducted an enquiry and sent a report to the RDO, Asifabad. Subsequently, the RDO, Asifabad passed orders vide File No.G917/2012 dated 24.07.2012 in favour of the defendant by cancelling the pattedar pass book and title deed as well as mutation proceedings in the name of the plaintiff. Suppressing the same, the plaintiff has approached this Court and filed present suit.

8. Before the trial Court, on behalf of the plaintiff PW1 to PW3 were examined and Exs.A1 to A17 were marked; on behalf of the defendant DW1 to DW3 were examined and Exs.B1 to B15 were marked.

9. The trial Court, after considering the entire material available on record, vide judgment and decree dated 28.12.2018, dismissed the suit. Aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff has filed the appeal in A.S.No.4 of 2019 before the III Additional District Judge, Adilabad, Asifabad, and the first appellate Court, on re-appreciation of the entire evidence and the material available on record, allowed the appeal vide judgment and decree dated 16.12.2021 and reversed the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. Hence