The High Court · 2025

...RespondenURespondenUPlaintiff lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the Hrgh Court may be pleased to stay the operation of the judgment and decree d1.18.04.2O24 in AS No. 1OB oI 2022 (Old AS. No. 21 2 of 2019)passed by the Chairperson, Land Reforms appellate Tribunal-cum-l-Additional District Judge, Hanumakonda pending disposal of the present Appeal. Counsel for the Appellant: Sri Vadeendra Joshi Counsel for the Respondent: Sri Bommineni Vivekananda The court delivered the following: JUDGMENT .+-.ffi ,"-F'?{ '/ -7 -- /,' 'f lre Hon'ble Smt . lustice Renuka Yarl Sccond A I No.401 of 2024 Jurlgrlrsllt: I lcarrl :ri Vadt't nrlra Joshr, Icarned counscl ii, rlrt rrPPt llanr arrtl Sri llot nrnrt.rrri Yrvckunanda. lcarncd cotrnscl fi ,r lt spontit rtt. on tlrt cqtrt stiorr r,l ;trltnisstorr. Pcruscrl thc rccord ) lhis rr ri Scconcl appcal prcf-errccl a113rier.crl 1,, tlrt ttn|r-r,'rttd jrLrL,.rrrcrrr .ln(l Llc.lcc clurccl 18.01.2024 in -\.S.No.ll)' ,)i ll)1-) '( )l(1 \.S.\o.ll2 ol ltlt9) or) thc filc oI thc Chairpctson. .trrtl I{cfirrttrs \ppcllatc I'rilrtrntl-cutn l ..\dditional District Judgt', IIrtr.tttttr:rkotrdit confirmirtg tlx .lLrdgnncnt atrd dccrcc datcd 06.06.201() i I ( ).5.\t,.ltr I rrf 20 orr thc fir'ol-thc Il\dditional-)unit>r Civil Judgc, $ ran.-qrtl J Initiellr. the rcspondcn t/plairr tiff hercrn t t'c[ suit vidc ().S.\o.261 ol 2{)l I for' pcrpcnral injunction against the ppcll:trtt hcrctn t,ith rcsllt'ct to lrousc rvith opcn land surroundcd br c. ticrrt |olcs und conrpounri rvrrll admcasuring 680 sq.yds. in Sy.r'l.-o. 1 I ),rf \\'adclcpllli Itevcnuc villarlc ar ,\sl-roka Colonv ,\rea, I-Ianamkoltl . Wirr:angal. 'l hc rcsporrdt'nt ac(lurro(l said land undcl regrstcred docuurt r r vicle No.1210 oi 2(l1l:1, (lare(l [7.0?.201() frorn lrer father Adepu i\[:rl i rlr, rr lro iu turn \ I I i I ; i i I I I I 1 ac(luired under rcsistcrcd (l()culncr)t vrclc \o.i965 of I997, rllted

29.12.1991 exccutccl b1, onc i). Goprl I{ao s'lro itr turtr purchasccl said l:lrrcl frorn one Nalla li.artra Su,atnt irr thc rt:tr [9ti5. lhc ttsporttlcnt subrnittcd an applicatron ftrr rcgula lizzrtroIt lrctbtc I(Lll) \ tncl prrrceetlings rvere issucd r.rdc No.l.ttS/(-'I /93/?0Il), rlatccl 3I.1.t-1.20I0 Said propern' rvas tssesscd tts 2-4-1531 /1 aricl pcrttrission \\'as qtitrllcLl virlc Pelnrit No.99, datccl 04.06.2010. Saitl propcrti hatl conrptILuttl rvall ancl cemcut poles. ()n 08.03.2011, thc altpcllrrrrr c:rusetl intcrli'rctrct' bv rlistr,rrbint thc contpound rv:rll and ccttrcnl polt:s. -['hcrckrrt'. sLrit ftrr pcrnerual injunctton rvas Frlecl. 'fhe appellant's crrse is os'ncrship o1'llncl t() zln extcnt of .\c.2.06 Gts. n S1'.No.1-17 irut not Sv-No l'19 .1. [-ipon crirrnining thc entile clocuntctltal \' <:r-itlc'ncc lLnd otal cliclcncc, thc suit has been decreecl. Lggrievecl br the slmc, the appcllant lrerein plcferred liirst .\ppcal antl said Filst -\ppcal rvas dismrsscd confirming thc judgncnt ancl clccrcc passcd bv the 'l lial coutt' \ggricr.ccl by the same, thc Present Sccond .\1lpea[ is prcfcrlctl rlising rhc Follor'"'ng substantial quesuons ttf leu'. a. Whether thc Appellatc Court crrcd in Failing to consiclcr that thc Srmplicitor suit lor llcrpctuitl irtitrnt ti"n is rr' 't :rrairrt:rinalrk ? I I lr. \\'hcrlrir. tlrt' plairrtiff hac] clcar titlc <x-er rl.i schcdulc Propt rtr': r . \\ hct lrcr r lrt phiritiff satisllcd rhc courr in p.. ,r.ing rhr r tlrc srlrt'titrlc l)r()l)crtv clocsn'r ftrnn part of Sr.), i l.l7i ri. \\ lrcrlrt r tlrc \ppeflatc corrrt crrcd in iorrrr rnirru thc rrrtqnrt'nt rlrld rlccrcc datccl 06 tj(r 2019 I asst.d in ( ).S.\,,.1(r I (,120 I 1?

5. \rnor)r' rh(. xt)o\(. subsrantial qucstions of l:r,., thc appt,llant t:r-nPlrrrsizt tI ( ), qucsti()rr No.(a) i.t, maintainabiLtr .rf ;r srrrr lil injurrr:ti.rr simPlrcir.r * hcn thcrc rs r t:loucl ()rl thc Ltl( ln that r.garcl. rcliarrcc is Plact,l Lrlton jrulqrncnt of tltc Hon'ble Strprcrr r (._oLrrt of lnclitr in case lrcrwc:r.rr RBANMS Educational Institution , . Gunashekar and anotherr. u'hcrt.in. it is hclcl that coni,evance r,l ny immor-ablc Pr()pcrn' rcqrIlr(,s c()mptrlson' registraflon under I cctron 1l of Rc$srrarion -\cr. 19()U. In the instant casc, thc respo . lenl has rchcrl ul)()r) an trrrcgisrcrcrl \grct.rncnt tlf Snlc cxccutcd lty N: I a Rama Srvarnr in far our ol' 13. ( ioltal Rao. Tlrcrcfbrc, a qucstion is isccl abotrr thc qc'nuincncss ot rrrlc ol'the respondcnt. Hcrc, the appcl :nt lost sigtrt of the fact thctc ri cxistencc oF a lrousc coupled witlt c rmpound rva[[. \\.I'rerr ll'u: rcsp.rclcnl is in occupatio. of such a housc om the trr'rc of construcli()11 oi r11id Iyy11qs in thc r,ear 2010, the gcnrurt , ress .I rhc title \ ' to:: S(-'( ()rl.irrr SC 791 I 4 cirlrnol [)c lookecl into and onlv Posscssion as on clatc of tLling of the sutt Ins to lre kroked into. The iu,-lonreut oi RBANMS (1 supra) is lrclu'ccn arr instinrfion whiclr has a l,case l)cccl rvhcrein:tn.\gtecttlctlr of Salc is (\ccutcd in favout of thc respondcnt and thcrc is attcll)Pt t() crc'.ltc t krucl over thc titlc. Such a [rrct pattcrrr is nrtt applic:rlrlc t( ) th(' l)rescnt C'TSC 6 Iiurthcr, Icarned counscl for the appcllant placctl reli:tucc on iLrdgrncnt of thc llon'[rlc Suprernc (-tturt of ]rtdia itr tht' t-ast bcnrtctt Tetsildar, Urban Improvement Trust and anothet r'. Ganga Bai Menariya (Dead) through Lrs. and othersr, s'hcrcir.t, it is hcld that a srrir lor sirnplicitor inlunction Ina)' not bc matntainablc s'herl thcrc is .1,,1r.,t. ,,.'", titlc of the propcrry of thc plairltift-. In rhc iost:ult crrse, thcre is no dispute over the utle of the respoudet-rt bctlrg krcatccl in Sr.No.149 over fhc propcttv of the appcllalt locatccl in Sr'.No.1'17. In thc case o[ Ganga Bai Menariya (2 supra), tl.rc suit rvas ft]etl seeking ot,ncrship and possession of thc suit iand. ln thc instant case, the rcspondent is alreadv in possession of house rvhich is surrottrrtletl bv cornp<;und rvall. Thc rclic f sought is to rcstrain thc appellant lrom interfcring w'lth his posscsslon ovcr thc property. I n Ganga Bai /124 SCC Onlinc SC 169 -'#-Grt rys;so- 9' 'r'- f Menariya (2 supra), tltctc ts a serious dispute aborrr t I titlc o[ the plarntiil as llcirl11 ptrrchasctl ['rotlr I):lrrchavat 'l'itartli r rtl siLid llLnd bcLrrrqint,. to thc (iol'crntnttlt- Irr tlrt instant c:tsc' tltrl is rlt> srrch disputc rtbotrt tllt .tctual trrlt r'f tllc rcspotrclct.tt c\cePt llli t tlrctc tn:lr lrc clctict trr tlrt tltlt'rltccl rlI l)loPcrtv s'llich is alreirdt rcg rlrrizctl ]rv lhe rcs;totrrlt'trr f idc I)r()cec(lhrgs \o-l'llS/C1/9312010' 'lr ' 'l 3 t 0l 2l)1() Ont-c ert \qrt'cltl.tlt ,rl s:tlt is rcgtrlarizcd' thc allpelllrrrr :]s 1l() casc [o :rllc11c clotrtl ott tltt tttlt. Sttrcc rhe I'r,,sscssl n Ls :rlt(lt ' prtlVcn ittrd corrtrfltrctl lrr rht lrral c()urt aS rvcll lls rhc l irsr \ppc I tc (.ouIt, thts (-otrrt rlots ltot s('( itll\' nrcrit in rlrc substantral qucsli' I I ot- lnrv rlliscd bl thc appt'll:rrlt. I hc apptllant is tfl irlg to crcate a clo I I over tlrc titlcr oi thc rc.pon,lc,tt t hcrc tlrt'rc is nrt such ceusc As s r lr' thc Second I \ppcal is nrtt tnrtirrtaina[rle,rtrcl liablc to bc rlisllusscd' 1 In tlrc rt strlt, thc Sccclncl \llpcal is dismiss'ri at thc stagc t(.) lrlrnis stotr \l() cos ls \fiscc errcotrs applications, iI ani-' pcndirrs II this Second \1l1lcal. :hall strrtd closcd SD/,I .GOWRI SHANKAR ,I) :PUTY REGISTRAR _,/_ //TRUE COPY// To, \ 1. The Chairperson, Land Reforms Appellate Tribut\3 \ Judge, Hanumakonda (with ,"66165, ii any) 2. The ll Additional Junior Crvil Judge's Court at Waran 3 One CC to Sri Vadeendra Joshi, Advocate IOPUC] 4 One CC to Sn Bommineni Vivekananda, Advocate I )*: 5 Two CD Cooies 'framrPSt -...'--/. \ I decnou oFFtcER \ l-O r 1-l Additional District ga. OF,I C] t, - - - 4t-EAEil HIGH COURT DATED:10109t2O25 JUDGMENT SA.No.401 ot 2024 I S Tr I / (- 't ( I A [25 ? I 6 ^.: lt( ,nrar,,',-,;yy'/ z-':'-' THE SECOND APPEAL !S DISMISSED AT THE STAGE OF ADMISSION : i i )1 (, LL