VEGESNA RATNAMMA Vs. CHINTA VENKATESWARLU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff in O.S.No.7 of 1982 on the file of the District Munsiff, Narsapur. The respondent is the defendant in the suit. The plaintiff filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant and his men from interfering with the lane between the houses of the plaintiff and the defendant and to grant mandatory injunction directing the defendant to remove the eves of his tiled house extended to the lane.

(2.) The defendant contended that the disputed land is his exclusive lane and the plaintiff has no manner of right over the same. He further contended that there is used to be a thatched house by the time of his purchasing the house and after obtaining permission from the municipality, he constructed a tiled house in the same place at which the thatched house used to exist and as the lane exclusively belongs to him, the plaintiff has no right to ask for any relief against the defendant. Therefore, the suit is liable to be dismissed.

(3.) Both the parties adduced oral and documentary evidence. After perusal of the same, the trial Court dismissed the suit holding that the plaintiff is not entitled for the relief as prayed for. Being aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff preferred A.S.No.6 of 1992 on the file of the Subordinate Judge at Narsapur and the appeal was also dismissed confirming the judgment and decree of the trial Court. Being aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff preferred the present appeal.