The court reaffirmed that for granting injunctive relief, the property must be clearly identifiable and that a prima facie case must be established.

ORDER :

G.RADHA RAN, J.

CRP No.567 of 2019 is filed by the petitioner-appellant-plaintiff aggrieved by the order dated 19.11.2018 passed in CMA No.12 of 2017 against the order dated 09.10.2017 in I.A. No.488 of 2015 in O.S. No.118 of 2015, by the Principal District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy.

2. CRP No.1024 of 2019 is filed by the same petitioner- appellant-plaintiff aggrieved by the order dated 19.11.2018 passed in CMA No.13 of 2017 against the order dated 09.10.2017 in I.A. No.489 of 2015 in O.S. No.118 of 2015, by the Principal District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy.

3. I.A. No.488 of 2015 was filed by the petitioner-plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC for grant of temporary injunction to restrain the respondent No.1-defendant No.1 from alienating the petition schedule property, pending disposal of the suit. I.A. No.489 of 2015 was filed by the petitioner-plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC for grant of temporary injunction to restrain the respondent No.1-defendant No.1 from making any constructions in the petition schedule property, pending disposal of the suit.

4. The petitioner-plaintiff filed affidavits in support of both the applications stating that he was the owner and possessor of open land bearing plot Nos.78 and 79 in Survey No.6 admeasuring 600 sq.yds having purchased the same by way of registered sale deed dated 31^st July, 2007 vide document No.15798/2007 from Sri Repala Ashok Kumar. Sri Repala Ashok Kumar inturn purchased the said property through registered sale deed document No.4442 of 1989 from original pattedars Smt. D. Ananthamma and others through their GPA holder Sri Komma Siva Kumar Reddy, in whose favour GPA was executed vide document No.1337/88, dated 29.11.1988. The petitioner also purchased an open plot No.126 in Survey No.6 admeasuring 300 sq.yds., by way of registered sale deed executed on 25.07.2007 vide document No.19892/2007 from N.V. Shyam Sundar Raju, who inturn purchased the same from D. Ananthamma and others under a registered sale deed document No.4443 of 1989, dated 6-10- 1989 at S.R.O., Sanga Reddy. Medak District. The above plots bearing Nos.78, 79 and 126 were detailed in a layout plan stated to have been approved by Kistareddypet Gram Panchayat. Thus, his title and possession and that of his predecessors’ title could be traced with effect from 06.10.1989. The respondent No.1-defendant No.1 dispossessed the petitioner-plaintiff from the afore mentioned land in December 2014 on the strength of concocted and fabricated documents. They were brought into existence in collusion with persons who had neither title nor possession of lands. A new layout was brought into existence in collusion with the concerned authorities by two of the original owners and others claiming under the then original owners, notwithstanding the fact that the original owners had lost title and possession by virtue of sale deeds executed in favour of his vendors in the year 1989. The petitioner and his vendors had perfected title and possession on the basis of registered sale deeds executed in their favour by original owners through their GPA. They had also perfected their title by adverse possession by being openly in continuous possession to the knowledge of the real owners for more than twelve years since the date of purchase. Upon the strength of the new layout, the said plot Nos.78, 79 and 126 were erased and the respondent-defendant No.1 used his clout with the local authorities and managed to get entries made in his name in revenue records. The said entries were false and baseless. The respondent No.1-defendant No.1 gifted the land in Sy.No.6 to his wife, as such,