VADLA VEERABHADRAPPA Vs. CHALLA VENKATAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the Additional District Judge, Anantapur, dated 5/02/1958, in A. S. No. 64 of 1957, on the file of the said Court, ordering remand of the suit to the Court of first instance, namely the Court of the District Munsif of Anantapur for fresh disposal.

(2.) The question for determination in this appeal is whether the order of remand passed by the Additional District Judge is legally sound and supportable.

(3.) The plaintiff brought the suit O. S. 275 of 1955 out of winch this present appeal has arisen for a declaration of his rights as well as that of the village community to use the public pathway indicated in the plaint plan, and to the peaceful enjoyment thereof as well as the open space around a certain fire pit situated in the area, and for an injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the said rights, and for a mandatory injunction for the removal of the carts of the defendant from the place marked C in the plaint plan and to close up the new and unauthorised pathway marked AB in the plaint plan.The defendant contested the suit on various grounds. Based on the respective contentions in the pleadings, the learned District Munsif, who tried the suit, framed issues in which the question whether the defendant has obstructed the plaintiff in the exercise of his right of way, and therefore the latter was entitled to the injunction prayed for, was raised, besides the question whether the plaintiff had acquired a right of way by prescription over the plot marked C in the plaint plan.After a careful and elaborate consideration of the evidence adduced on either side in the case, the learned District Munsif came to the conclusion that the plaintiff as well as the village community had acquired a right of way through the plot C in the plaint plan, which is part of a public pathway. He also found that the defendant had obstructed the plaintiff in the exercise of his right of way and that, therefore, the plaintiff was entitled to the injunction prayed for. So holding, the learned District Munsif decreed the suit with costs.