MARAIAH @ MARIYAIAH (SINCE DEAD BY L.RS. CHIKAMOOGAIAH S/O LATE MARAIAH @ MARIYAIAH, SMT. THAYAMMA D/O LATE MARAIAH @ MARIYAIAH W/O KAPANAIAH AND PARVATHAMMA D/O LATE MARAIAH @ MARIYAIAH W/O DODDADYAVIAH) Vs. ANNAIAH S/O LATE MARAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant who was the Plaintiff before the trial court had sought for the relief of injunction. The Appellant sought to base his case on four exhibits, Ex.P1 to P4. Ex.P1 to P3 were RTC extracts and Ex.P4 was a tax -paid receipt.

(2.) THE trial court having decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff, the same was challenged in appeal. The lower appellate court has reversed the findings on the footing that the trial court could not have drawn a presumption in favour of the Appellant -Plaintiff only on the basis of the RTC extracts, which were disputed by the Defendant and when the Defendant had also produced revenue records to demonstrate that the Defendant was also claiming possession over the property.

(3.) THE lower appellate court has rightly held that if presumption to be drawn in favour of the plaintiff, the RTC entries have to be supported by mutation entries in his favour, which was not forthcoming. Therefore, there is no substantial question of law that would arise for consideration in the present appeal. The Appellant's remedy is to file a comprehensive suit for recovery of possession if the Appellant is in a position to establish his title to the property, when there is a serious dispute by the Defendant. The substantial questions of law sought to be framed in the present appeal do not arise for consideration.