SHAIK SHAMIUNNISA Vs. NARRAVULA OBULAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant filed O.S. No. 41 of 2006 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Rayachoty, against the Respondents, for the relief of declaration that the suit schedule property is a public rasta in Bosenagar, Rayachoty; for mandatory injunction, for removal of existing structures and for a consequential relief of injunction to restrain Respondent No. 1 and her son- Respondent No. 2 from interfering with the use of the same. She pleaded that the lane, shown as ABCDEF in the plaint plan, is a public road and still Respondents 1 and 2 are claiming it to be their exclusive passage and preventing the Appellant and other men in the locality from using it. It was alleged that the original owner of the land, by name Narravula Chendrayudu Naidu, carved out plots, by leaving roads for ingress and egress, and the residents of the locality have purchased such plots and have constructed houses. According to her, the suit lane is an access for the residents of the locality to the bus stand and there was no basis for the Respondents in preventing the use thereof. She pleaded that though she alone figured as Plaintiff, the suit is filed for and on behalf of the residents of Bosenagar, Rayachoty.

(2.) On behalf of Respondents 1 and 2, a written statement was filed. They raised objection, as to the maintainability of the suit, on the ground that though it is filed in representative capacity, the permission of the Court was not obtained. They denied the assertions made by the Appellant that she owns a plot in the locality. They pleaded that the suit schedule property exclusively belongs to them and it is not at all a public lane.

(3.) The trial Court decreed the suit through judgment, dated 01.09.2008. Respondents 1 and 2 filed A.S. No. 78 of 2008 in the Court of V Additional District Judge, Rayachoty. The appeal was allowed through judgment, dated 16.01.2010. Hence, this Second Appeal.