(1.) This is an assignee-decreeholders' appeal preferred under Order 21, Rule 103, C. P. C. (as amended) against an order made by the learned 5th Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyd. in E A No. 60/82 filed under Order 21, Rule 97, C P C. in E P No. 6/80 in 0 S No. 121/70. while allowing E A No. 60/82, the trial Judge considered it. ''a fit case in which a surveyor should be sent to demarcate S No. 148 and also S Nos. 150/1 and 2 after showing the boundaries by the surveyor of S No. 148 with the aid of the village plan of Shaikpet village, the possession of the schedule mentioned property in S No. 148 is to be given to the decree holders by removing any obstruction in it. I feel in the circumstances the petition is to be allowed, ordering the surveyor to demarcate S No. 150/1 and 2 and also S No. 148 and show the boundaries to the bailiff."
(2.) The main grievance of the assignee-decree-holders is that though E. A. No. 60/82 was allowed in their favour, the aforesaid directions given by the learned trail Judge have pernicious consequences if the identification of the property is to be made by the surveyor demarcating S.No. 148 from S.Nos. 150/1 and 2 and if the obstruction which they sought to remove is to be confined only to the S. No. 148 referred to above without reference to the real dispute between the parties, viz., the physical identity of the property in dispute between the contesting parties.
(3.) To collect the true facts which form the background for this litigation, we have to start from the proceedings which had their initial start in civil suit No. 7/58 on the original side of this Court.