Back
K. SURENDER
G. S. N. Prasad – Appellant
Versus
G. Madhusudhan Reddy – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The plaintiff being unsuccessful in both the Courts below, has filed the present Second Appeal.
2. Appellant is the plaintiff in the trial Court and respondents are defendants. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter will be referred to as arrayed in the trial Court. Suit was filed by plaintiff vide OS No.1715 of 2003 and thereafter AS No.259 of 2009, questioning the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.1715 of 2003.
3. The plaintiff filed Suit for grant of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property. Plaint’s schedule property is part of Plot no. 7.
4. Briefly, the case of the plaintiff is that he purchased 1,479 square yards in old Survey No. 129/71 (new no. 144) of Shaikpet village, Road No. 2, Banjara Hills from Kamal under a registered sale deed dated 5.9.1968 (Ex.A1). Subsequently, the municipal corporation acquired 257 square yards for road widening, leaving the plaintiff with the remaining 1,222 square yards.
5. The defendants claimed no knowledge of the location of the land as claimed by plaintiff. They asserted that the plaintiff mistakenly claimed the
The burden of proof to establish title and possession lies with the plaintiff, and failure to meet this burden results in dismissal of the claim.
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.
A simple suit for injunction is not maintainable when there is a dispute over title, and the plaintiffs must prove possession within the claimed boundaries.
No substantial questions of law arise in second appeal where lower courts' factual findings on title, admissions, and commissioner's report are not perverse.
Point of law: The principle of lis pendens is still settled principle of law. In this connection, the Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Ram Peary, AIR 1978 All 318] has considered the scope o....
Concurrent findings of fact by the Trial Court and First Appellate Court are binding and cannot be interfered with under Section 100 of the CPC.
Boundaries specified in a sale deed prevail over measurements when determining property ownership.
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
