MUNISHAMANNA Vs. SAROJAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the caveator-respondent.

(2.) This appeal is filed challenging the order passed by the Trial Court on I.A.No.1, wherein temporary injunction is granted in favour of the respondent/plaintiff restraining the appellant/defendant from putting up further construction over suit schedule 'B' property, pending disposal of the suit.

(3.) The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiff while seeking the relief of temporary injunction before the Trial Court is that she is the absolute owner of all that piece and parcel of the property bearing Sy.No.44, old Sy.No.44/P13 and new Sy.No.83 measuring to an extent of 12 1/2 guntas out of the total extent of 2 acres 2 guntas on the southern side of the suit schedule 'A' property consisting of a newly constructing structure on it without having roof measuring 1,001 feet of the structure. The suit schedule 'B' property is the part and parcel of the suit schedule 'A' property and sought for the relief of temporary injunction.