J U D G M E N T:

The plaintiffs in O.S.No.58 of 1991 on the file of District Munsif, Dhone, are the Appellants. The respondents are the defendants in the suit. Originally suit was filed by the appellants 1, 2 and 3 during the pendency of the Second Appeal, Appellants 1 and 3 died and thereafter, Appellants 10 to 14 added as their legal representatives.

2. The appellants and respondents hereinafter be referred to as plaintiffs and defendants as arrayed before the trial Court.

3. The plaintiffs instituted the suit against defendants seeking relief of permanent injunction and also sought relief of mandatory injunction for removal of encroachment made by the respondents in the plaint schedule property, which is shown in Ex.A.5 plaint plan. The plaint schedule property is land situated at Dhone Town in S.R.No.255/2F to an extent of Ac.1.2 cents out of which Ac.0-79‰ cents bounded by East:S.No.264, West:Land of K.V.Nagaraju and others, North:Pumpu of J.Subbaiah Setty and South:Z.P.Guest House.

4. It is the contention of the plaintiffs that they have purchased Ac.0-79‰ cents site in S.R.No.255/2F situated at Dhone Town under registered sale deed, dated 22.10.1988 since then they have been in possession and enjoyment of the site. They submit that prior to their purchase their vendors were in possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule site. It is the contention of the plaintiffs that the defendants have not purchased any site in S.No.255 and land in S.No.264 is situated to the East of land in S.No.255/2F. The plaintiffs submit that they learnt that the defendants have purchased some site in S.No.264 and recently dug foundations raised walls to height of 4 to 5 feet by encroaching upon their site in S.No.255/2F to an extent of 18 feet X 18 feet, which they objected but made constructions in high handed manner. Hence, suit for permanent injunction and mandatory injunction.

5. The 1st defendant filed written statement denying the contention of the plaintiff. It is the contention of the 1st defendant that her husband purchased the site shown as “ABCD” in Ex.B.1 rough plan about 16 years back under agreement of sale and obtained registered sale deed in the year, 1988 wherein her husband constructed a hut in “ABCD” portion shown in Ex.B.1 plan about 16 years back and enjoyed the same without objection by the plaintiffs or their vendors at any time and thereafter her husband constructed the house in “ABCD” portion in the year, 1990-91 after demolishing the old hut, for which, the plaintiffs or their vendor never objected. He submits that her house construction was completed before filing of the suit due to that suit for injunction simpliciter is not maintainable. It is also the contention of the 1st defendant that suit S.No.255/2 land originally belongs to K.Venkata Seshayya Shetty after his death his sons enjoyed the same wherein the plaintiffs and their vendors had no title and the sons of K.Venkata Seshayya Shetty filed suit against the plaintiffs vendor for declaration of title in the year, 1984 in O.S.No.155 of 1984 on the file of District Munsif Court, Dhone, which was dismissed on 27.02.1990 and thereafter the plaintiffs in O.S.No.155 of 1984 filed appeal before III Additional District Court, Kurnool, in A.S.No.25 of 1990, which was allowed on 26.04.1993 with costs throughout setting aside the Judgment and decree, dated 27.02.1990 made in O.S.No.155 of 1984 and decreed the suit against the vendors of plaintiffs. He submits that the plaintiffs vendor by name J.Subbayya Shetty filed the suit against K.Venkata Seshayya Shetty and sons on the file of District Munsif Court in O.S.No.1 of 1986, it was transferred to District Munsif Court, Kurnool, in the year, 1992, which was re-numbered as O.S.No.76 of 1992 wherein the plaintiffs herein were added as plaintiffs 2 to 4 in the year, 1990 and the said suit was dismissed for default on 25.06.1992. He submits that there is a cart track to the West side of site purchased by her husband running