JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari)

Heard Sri S. S. Prasad, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri N. Chidambara Sastry, learned counsel for the appellant, and Sri I. Madhu Babu, learned counsel, representing Smt. S. A. V. Ratnam, learned counsel for respondents Nos.1 & 2, on the point of maintainability of the appeal, in view of the objections raised by the Registry. Facts:

2. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 filed O.S.No.25 of 2025 in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Pithapuram against the appellant (1st defendant) and the respondent Nos.4 to 10 (defendants No.2 to 8). The suit was for declaration and injunction. The prayer in the suit reads as under:

“IX. Prayer:

It is humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a decree andjudgment infavour oftheplaintiffs and against thedefendants:

1. By Declaring the plaintiffs and as the absolute owner and possessor of the suit schedule property;

2. For consequential injunction restraining the Defendants, their men, agents, and other claiming to them from ever interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of theplaintiffovertheplaint schedule property.

3 . For consequentially declaring that the Set