JUDGMENT

The plaintiff in a suit for injunction is the appellant.

The suit was decreed by the trial court. But in appeal it was reversed setting aside the decree and judgment passed by the trial court. Hence, this appeal is filed.

2. It is contended by the plaintiff that as per a conveyance deed the plaintiff had obtained 3.29 acres of land comprised in Sy.No.130/7. It was also contended that as per the Thandaper No. 276/1, the plaintiff is the title holder of the property. The defendants contended that the plaintiff has no locus-standi to institute the suit. It was also contended that the plaint schedule property was an imaginary one and it is not in the possession of the plaintiff. It is further contended that the property claimed by the plaintiff is part of the public road owned by Peerumedu panchayat and there existed a wall separating the property of the estate from the road and that was demolished by the company to grab the plaint schedule property.

3. The person who claimed to be the authorised representative filed the suit and he was examined as PW1. Ext.A1, the Thandaper account was produced. On behalf of the defendants, DW1 and DW2 were examined and Exts.B1 to B5 were marked