BACHALA ANJAIAH Vs. ABDUL QAYYUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are the unsuccessful defendants in both the Courts below. The respondent-plaintiff instituted a suit in OS No. 107/85 on the file of the District Munsif, Shadnagar, claiming the relief of permanent injunction relating to plaint schedule property and the suit was decreed and aggrieved by the same, the defendants in the suit had preferred AS No. 3/90 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Mahaboobnagar, and the appeal was dismissed and aggrieved by the said judgment and decree made in the said appeal, the present second appeal is filed.

(2.) Sri Venkateshwarlu, the learned Counsel representing the appellant, had raised the following substantial questions of law :

(3.) Sri Jagannadha Sastry, the learned Counsel representing the respondent-plaintiff, on the other hand contended that these are the concurrent findings relating to the facts recorded by both the Courts below and in view of the limitations imposed on this Court under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure it is not a matter to be interfered with. The learned Counsel further contended that the respondent-plaintiff is only a purchaser of a portion of the property, which fell to the share of Jangaiah and the rest of the property is with PW4, the wife of Jangaiah. PW4, in fact, deposed that she continues to be in possession and she had supported the case of the respondent-plaintiff. The learned Counsel also had contended that the evidence of PWs. 1 to 4 and Exs.Al to A3 clearly establish the case of respondent-plaintiff and hence, the Courts below are justified in decreeing the suit. The learned Counsel also had taken me through the evidence of DWs. 1 to 3 and Exs.B1 to B4 is. this regard. The learned Counsel also submitted that as far as Ex.A3 is concerned, the entries therein are presumed to be correct until contrary is proved or until it is otherwise amended in accordance with the provisions of the A.P. Rights in Land and Paltcdar Pass Books Act, 1971.