HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

JUDGMENT:

This Second Appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 21.10.2024 in A.S.No.99 of 2019 on the file of the I Additional District Judge at Karimnagar, whereby and where under the judgment and decree dated 16.02.2018 in O.S.No.197 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge at Karimnagar was confirmed.

2. Heard Sri P. Bhanu Prakash, learned counsel for the appellant. 3. The appellant herein is defendant and respondent herein is plaintiff. For convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to as they were arrayed before the trial court.

4. The brief averments of the suit are that plaintiff filed suit in O.S.No.197 of 2010 for declaration declaring the plaintiff as owner, for mandatory injunction, for mesne profits in respect of plot bearing No.16 admeasuring 242 square yards in survey No.152 with house bearing No.9-8-114, situated at Ramnagar, Karimnagar District (herein after referred as “Suit Schedule Property”). It is averred that plaintiff is absolute owner of the suit schedule property having purchased the same from father of defendant under registered sale deed vide document No.5296 of 1976 dated 23.12.1976 and since the date of purchase, he has been in possession of suit property which was open plot at that point of time; that plaintiff is a conductor in A.P.S.R.T.C., worked in several places and he could not visit the plot for long time; that on 10.02.2010 he visited suit plot and found the defendant raised tin shed in the suit plot for which a door number 9-8-114 was given by the Municipal Authorities and when the plaintiff questioned by the defendant, she answered that it is plot No.8 and not plot No.16 and the same was given by her father; that a panchayat was held and the defendant promised vacate the suit plot, however, she filed suit in O.S.No.91 of 2010 and obtained injunction order against the plaintiff. On 18.05.2010, the plaintiff got issued legal notice to the defendant by calling upon her to deliver vacant and peaceful possession of the suit schedule property but the defendant refused to receive the same. Hence, the suit.

5. Defendant filed a written statement denying the averments made in the plaint and further stated that father of defendant and others purchased land admeasuring Ac.0.30 guntas in survey No.1052 situated at industrial area, Ramnagar, Karimnagar through a registered sale deed bearing document No.1346 of 1976, dated 25.05.1976 and the same was developed into plots and were sold to different persons and kept one plot each with them; that her father has given plot No.16 to her and she constructed tin shed in the said land in the year 2000 and the Commissioner Municipality, Karimnagar assigned door No.9-8-114 and issued demand notice defendant for payment of property tax from 01.04.2002 to 03.03.2004 and since the date of assessment the defendant have been paying the property tax to municipality; that she has obtained tap connection and also paid water charges and ownership certificate was issued by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Karimnagar on 20.02.2010. It is further averred that her father expired on 06.09.2010 on that she filed a suit for perpetual injunction against the plaintiff in O.S.No.91 of 2010 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar and obtained injunction orders in I.A.No.249 of 2010 against the plaintiff vide order dated

09.03.2010 and thus prayed to dismiss the suit.

6. Basing on the above pleadings, the trial Court framed following issues:

(i) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for declaration as prayed for?

(ii) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for mandatory injunction as prayed for?

(iii) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for mesne profits?

(iv) To what relief?

7. During the course of trial, the plaintiff himself was examined as P.W.1 and got marked Exs.A.1 to A.5, and also examined P.W.2. Defendant examined herself as D.W.1 and got marked Exs.B.1 to B.54.

8. The trial Court on du