JUDGMENT:

Assailing the judgment and decree dated 14.08.2000 in O.S.No.242 of 1985 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupathi, the unsuccessful plaintiffs in the suit, filed the above appeal.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties to this appeal are referred to as they were arrayed in suit.

3. Plaintiffs filed the suit seeking declaration of plaintiffs’ right to continue in possession and enjoyment of plaint A schedule property and permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with plaintiffs’ possession and enjoyment of plaint A schedule property and other reliefs.

4. The case of the plaintiffs, in brief, is that an extent of Ac.9.89 cents of land in S.No.242/8 of Tirupathi Rural Mandal, described as plaint B schedule property, belonged to 1st defendant Sri Hathiramji Mutt, Tirupathi. Plaint A schedule property is an extent of Ac.5.73 cents is part and parcel of plaint B schedule property. In respect of remaining extent i.e., Ac.4.16 cents permanent patta was granted by Mahant of Mutt to one Ramaswamy Modali and Kuppuswamy Modali under a registered document dated 01.04.1908. One of the permanent pattadars, Kuppuswamy Modali sold his half share in the said land to I.Narasamma and I.Muttamma under a sale deed dated

04.12.1913. The said Narasamma and Muttamma died and their sons I.Narayana Swamy and others sold the land to Ramaswamy Modali under a registered sale deed dated 14.02.1918. Ramaswamy Modali sold the same to Mangamma and Devanamma under a registered sale deed dated 30.01.1933, who in turn sold the same to K.Perumal Modali under a registered sale deed dated 25.08.1942. The said K.Perumal Modali sold the land to 1st plaintiff under a registered sale deed dated 24.11.1958 and since then 1st plaintiff has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of plaint B schedule property. 1st defendant filed suit O.S.No.358 of 1971 on the file of II Additional District Munsif, Tirupathi for recovery of possession of part of plaint B schedule property (Ac.4.16 cents) and for damages on the ground that permanent patta dated 01.04.1908 is not valid. The said suit was dismissed on contest on 23.04.1977 and the appeal A.S.No.68 of 1977 was also dismissed on 21.06.1985. Plaint A schedule property is tank locally called as ‘Kaminigunta’ and the said tank is source of irrigation to plaint B schedule property. There are no other lands under the ayacut of said Kaminigunta and the right of taking water was recognized by defendants 1 and 2 and the same was also recorded in the revenue records. In or about 1940 at the request of K.Perumal Modali, the then Mahant of 1st defendant granted permanent patta by way of Takid dated 01.03.1943 in respect of A schedule property. The said Perumal Modali sold the said land to the plaintiff under a sale letter dated 01.03.1959 and delivered possession and since then, 1st plaintiff has been continuously in possession of the plaint A schedule property by raising crops therein. Letters dated 26.03.1957 and 23.02.1958 also confirm possession of 1st plaintiff’s vendors over entire plaint B schedule property. 1st plaintiff also stated that she perfected her title over the plaint B schedule property by adverse possession. When the defendants 1 and 2 and their supporters tried to plough plaint A schedule property, initially suit was filed for permanent injunction and later suit was amended one for declaration of plaintiff’s right to continue in possession and enjoyment of plaint A schedule property and permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with plaintiff’s possession and enjoyment of plaint A schedule property. Pending suit, the sole plaintiff (1st plaintiff) died and plaintiffs 2 and 3 were added as her legal representatives.

5. 2nd Defendant in the suit filed written statement and the same was adopted by 1st defendant. In the written statement, it was contended that suit is not maintainable as Section 80 of CPC notice was not issued. Plaint ‘A’ schedule proper