T. VENKATESH Vs. S. KRISHNA REDDY AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR . T. Venkatesh, the petitioner, has challenged the legality of the order dated 5.09.2015 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Hospet, whereby the learned Senior Civil Judge has dismissed the application filed by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.

(2.) IN short the facts of the case are that Mr. S. Krishna Reddy, respondent No. 1, had filed a Civil Suit against the petitioner and respondent Nos. 2 to 19 for mandatory injunction and possession before the learned Civil Judge, (Jr. Dn.), in the form of O.S. No. 235/2006. He had prayed that the respondents, including the petitioner, should be directed to remove the temporary structures put up by them on the suit property which is under his possession. According to him, the suit related to Sy. No. 217A/1 admeasuring 0.76 acres situated at Hospet, District Bellari. According to respondent No. 1, he had purchased the suit property from one Mr. Ajit, through a registered sale deed on 13.01.2006. The property was handed over to him. Subsequently, his name has been entered in the concerned record. However, the petitioner being a City Councilor, on muscle power, had trespassed into the suit property. The petitioner had instigated respondent Nos. 2 to 19 to put up constant shed of temporary nature upon the suit property. He further pleaded that the petitioner had started manufacturing bricks on the said property.

(3.) MR . M.G. Naganuri, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, has contended that since the respondent had not made out a cause of action, the plaint deserves to be rejected. Secondly, that unless there is a prayer for declaration, the civil suit does not deserve to be continued. Thirdly, that the civil suit was undervalued. However, these aspects have been overlooked by the learned Civil Judge. Therefore, the impugned order deserves to be interfered with.