KROTHAPALLI SATYANARAYANA Vs. KOGANTI RAMAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted.

(2.) Petitioner is the original plaintiff. He filed a suit for a declaration and for removal of an encroachment by first constructing a wall in a passage used as a lane for passing and repassing at points W W-1 and also by dumping some earth from A to A-1 in the sketch referred to by the learned Munsif in his judgment and thereby obstructed the plaintiff from passing and repassing with cattle and carts from the lane.

(3.) This suit was resisted by the defendants 2 and 3 as per the written statement, inter alia, contending that the compound wall has been constructed at the boundary of the land of their ownership which defendant No. 2 purchased in 1912 from one Kodali Subbaiah. It was alleged that about 13 years back, defendants Nos. 2 and 3 raised the level of the open land to the west of the wall to a height of one yard because they are owners of half of the area, divided North South of the open space beyond the western wall of their house. The measurements given by the plaintiff were disputed.