JUDGMENT

Defendants in O.S.No.385 of 2005 of the Court of learned Munsiff, Perumbavoor are the appellants before me, challenging the decree for mandatory injunction granted by the first appellate court in A.S.No.25 of 2010.

2. Respondent sued the appellants and others for declaration and prohibitory and mandatory injunction. Plaint A schedule belongs to the respondent and he alleged that appellants and others, by removing earth from plaint B schedule in large scale has caused loss of lateral support to plaint A schedule and hence prayed for declaration, prohibitory injunction to restrain appellants and others from removing further earth from plaint B schedule resulting in loss of lateral support to plaint A schedule and for a mandatory injunction to construct retaining wall to provide the lost lateral support. Trial court found that respondent is entitled to the prohibitory injunction prayed for but, declined to grant mandatory injunction for the reason that respondent has not pleaded the extent of property in plaint B schedule required to be retained to provide lateral support. Respondent challenged that part of the decree which went against him in A.S.No.25 of 2010. Learned Sub Ju