PATEL BASAVARAJU Vs. SUDESHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the appellant regarding admission of the Regular Second Appeal. Perused the judgments of the Trial Court and as well the Appellate Court. The appellant herein is the plaintiff before the Trial Court, filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from causing hindrance to the free movement of the plaintiff to reach PWD road from the suit schedule property situated on its eastern side. The plaintiff claim that he is the owner of the suit schedule property acquired under the grant in the year 1974 for upset price of Rs. 40/ -, the katha stands in his name and he has been in lawful possession and enjoyment of the said property.

(2.) IT is the contention of the plaintiff that he has put up main door of his house towards east and there is a PWD road situated abutting the eastern boundary of his property. The defendant has been interfering with the plaintiffs ingress and egress to the said PWD road from his house. Therefore, he filed a suit against the defendant. After appearance, the defendant contested the suit stating that the plaintiff has given a wrong boundary to his property, wrongly explaining that there is a PWD road situated immediately after the plaint schedule property.

(3.) THE Trial Court on the basis of the rival pleadings framed the following issues: