ORDER:

This civil revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed challenging the orders, dated 20.09.2021, allowing I.A.No.400 of 2021 in O.S.No.62 of 2021 on the file of the Court of Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jangareddigudem, filed under Order I Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC to implead petitioners 1 & 2/proposed defendants

2 & 3 as parties to the suit.

2. Heard Sri P. Rama Rayudu, learned counsel for the revision petitioners and Sri K. Jyothi Prasad, learned counsel for the respondents 1 & 2.

3. The revision petitioners filed the suit for declaration that they are the absolute owners of the plaint schedule site and for consequential permanent injunction against the 1st defendant Municipality/respondent No.3 herein not to lay any road in the said site shown as ‘ABCD’ in the plaint plan at any time. In nutshell, the case of the plaintiffs is that they are the owners of the said site and that they removed the western side compound wall about three years back to make a straight line for vastu purpose and thus kept the plaint schedule property as a vacant site and using the same for parking their vehicles and that they are enjoying the suit schedule site and the way provided to them under the registered sale deed, dated 19.09.1977, to reach the southern side panchayat road. It is further pleaded that traces of the old compound wall on the western side are still visible to the naked eye. It is also pleaded that immediate western side owners by names Gupta and one Rampandu also left some site on their eastern side while constructing their respective houses and simply because the plaintiffs left some site on the western side of their house, either the 1st defendant municipality or the general public do not get any right to use the plaint schedule site as a public passage. The plaintiffs claim that due to political pressure, the municipality tried to lay a cement road in the plaint schedule property highhandedly even without giving notice to the plaintiffs, and therefore, they applied for survey of their site to the Mandal Surveyor, vide application, dated 10.03.2020, and also filed W.P.No.7549 of 2021 before the High Court against the municipality for trying to lay road across the said property and the High Court declined to grant stay and the writ petition is still pending, but the plaintiffs are advised to file the suit for declaration of title since the title cannot be decided in a writ petition.

4. While the matter stood thus, the respondents 1 & 2 herein filed I.A.No.400 of 2021 to get themselves impleaded as defendants

2 & 3 in the suit claiming that it is a public road and also that they have their house and site on the west of the plaint schedule property having purchased the same from Shaik Nagoor Meera under a registered sale deed, dated 31.07.2014, and before the said sale, the vendors left only site of width of 9 feet and length of 51 feet for a total extent of 49 square yards on the east of house site of the petitioners and that on the further east of the said site, there is a panchayat street in existence and that the said street was existing for about 40 years and the panchayat laid gravel road and the same is being used by the neighbouring house owners and the public at large to reach the northern side main road. The petitioners further contended that the municipality of Jangareddigudem is now proposing to lay cement road of width of 12 feet. The petitioners further contended that when the plaintiffs were trying to encroach the public road with an intention to make unauthorized constructions, the 1st petitioner made a requisition to the municipality on 11.02.2201 and 06.04.2021 and also to the R.D.O., Jangareddigudem on 06.04.2021 requesting to take necessary action. The municipality got issued a notice, dated 16.04.2021 to the 2nd petitioner stating that some people unauthorizedly blocked the road and demanded to submit the documents of the petitioners. It