PADAMATI VEERASWAMY Vs. ANKEM NACHARAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.)

(2.) On 8-12-1997, this Court admitted the second appeal while framing the following substantial questions of law:

(3.) Is the Appellate Court justified in decreeing the suit for injunction after finding that the plaintiff was not in possession of the suit Plot No.23 as on the date of filing of the suit? 2. Whether the Court can grant such decree under Order 41 Rule 33 C.P.C. under which Appellate Court has the power to pass any decree which ought to have been passed? In CMP No.5264/97, the interim suspension granted on 30-4-1997 had had been extended until further orders. 3. Anken Nancharamma, respondent in the second appeal, as against the judgment made in O.S. No.286/87 on the file of I Additional District Munsif, Machilipatnam, which was received by transfer and numbered as O.S, No, 158/87 on the file of District Munsif, Bantumilli, filed A.S.No.12/ 90 on the file of I Additional District Judge, Krishna, Machilipatnam. The suit was filed by the plaintiff as against the appellants herein, defendants in the suit, for declaration of title and consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, followers from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property by the plaintiff and for costs of the suit.