SWETHAMBER MURTHY PUJAK JAIN SANGH Vs. ILLURU URUKUNDAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal has a very long career. The litigation, which is the subject matter of the suit, is going on for the past 23 years.

(2.) The Appellant is a Religious Association. It has acquired property covered by Door Nos. 18-178, 18-180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186 and 187 in Kurnool town. It filed O.S. No. 313 of 1987 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool, against the Respondent, for the relief of perpetual injunction, to restrain him from opening door in AD joint wall shown in the plaint plan and from using the site lying to its West, as a rastha for ingress and egress to the premises, bearing No. 18-188. The Appellant pleaded that over the period, it has acquired the property shown as 'E F G H' in the plan, abutting a road on the northern side and that the Respondent is having his premises on the western corner of 'E F G H', separated by wall AD. According to them, though the Respondent has a big opening and access for his property to the main road, he proposed to open a door into the exclusive property of the Appellant, with an oblique motive.

(3.) The Respondent opposed the suit by filing written statement. His case is that the property shown in 'E F G H' is a public lane and the Appellant does not have any exclusive right over it. The particulars of various properties acquired by the Appellant and by himself are furnished in detail. The summary of his contention was that the property in 'E F G H' was being used as parking place by the owners and the users of the nearby go-down and the Appellant does not have any exclusive right.