PAREPALLI PALLALAYYA Vs. KASAGANI RAMULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order passed by the Junior Civil Judge, Chintalapudi, in IA No.590 of 1998 in OS No. 155 of 1994, whereby the application for amendment of the plaint has been dismissed.

(2.) The petitioner-plaintiff has filed a suit for permanent injunction alleging that, he along with his brother namely Ramulu, had purchased the plaint schedule property orally for a valuable consideration in or about the year 1970 from Kasagani Lingamma, Kasagani Laxmamma Swamy, the wife and son of one late Mallayya and they have been in cultivating possession of the same to the knowledge, inter alia, of the defendants. Patta has also been granted in favour of himself and his brother. In the alternative, he has pleaded that due to the long and uninterrupted continuous possession adverse to the interests of the defendants, he and his brother had perfected title by adverse possession. Since the defendants are threatening his possession, he is entitled for permanent injunction.

(3.) The defendants through their written statement filed on 7-6-1995 denied the claim of the petitioner-plaintiff. They denied that the plaintiff is the owner in possession of the plaint schedule property. Issues were framed on 5-7-1995.