1
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT
RAMANNAPET
(Dated this the 08th day of June, 2022)
Present: - Sri M.Arjun,
Prl.Junior Civil Judge, Ramannapet.
O.S. No.187 of 2020
Between:
1.Sri Nadigoti Sathaiah S/o Late Narsaiah, Aged: 54 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o Kakkireni village, Ramannapet Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir district.
2.Sri Nadigoti Paandu S/o Late Narsaiah, Aged: 48 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o Kakkireni village, Ramannapet Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir district.
3.Sri Nadigoti Krishna S/o Late Narsaiah, Aged: 45 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o Kakkireni village, Ramannapet Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir district.
... Plaintiffs
And
Sri Nadigoti Shivaiah S/o Late Mallaiah, Aged: 58 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o Kakkireni village, Ramannapet Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir district … Defendant
This suit is coming before me for hearing in the presence of
Sri B.Ashok Kumar, the learned counsel for the Plaintiffs and the Defendant is set ex-parte and the matter having been stood over for consideration, this court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1.This Suit is filed for perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants, their heirs, agents, servants, workmen and henchmen from interfering with the
Plaintiff’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Plaintiff over the plaint schedule property with costs.
The brief averments of the plaint are as follows:-
OS.No.187/2020
2
2.The Plaintiffs no.1 to 3 are the own brothers and sons of Late Nadigoti
Narsaiah. After the death of their father namely Narsaiah, under Pouthi proceedings, the plaintiff no.1 acquired land in suit survey no.354/AA1 to an extent of Ac.0-08gts apart from other non-suit numbers, the plaintiff no.2 acquired lands in suit survey nos.354/A1 to an extent of Ac.0-08gts in sy.no.355/AA2 to an extent of Ac.0-03gts in sy.no.380/Ruu2 to an extent of Ac.0-25gts and in sy.no.381/UU to an extent of Ac.0-33gts apart from other non suit survey numbers.
Similarly, the plaintiff no.3 acquired lands in suit survey no.354/UU to an extent of
Ac.0-20gts in sy.no.355/AA2 to an extent of Ac.0-03gts in sy.no.380/E2 to an extent of Ac.0-25gts and in sy.no.381/AA2 to an extent of Ac.0-33gts apart from other non suit survey numbers totally admeasuring Ac.3-38gts which are dry cum wet lands situated at Kakkireni village of Ramannapet Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir
District. It is specifically submitted that though the separate pattadar pass books, 1-B Namoonas and pahanies for each plaintiff issued by the revenue department, but the suit property is in joint possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff cumulatively.
3. It is further submitted that as per the provisions of the Telangana State lands in Pattadar pass book Act and Rule, the plaintiffs 1 to 3 have been issued Digital pattadar pass books cum Title deeds bearing No.T30130110792, dated: 29-04- 2018, T30130110098, dated: 05-09-2018 and T30130110097, dated: 05-09-2018 respectively and also issued 1-B Namuna (ROR) and the Tahsildar, Ramannapet also recorded the plaintiffs 1 to 3 as actual possessor and enjoyers of the suit property as per the Mee Seva Pahanies for the years 2018, 2019 and 2020. Thus it is clear that the plaintiffs are absolute owners, pattadars and possessors of the suit property and they are raising dry crops and also for grazing purpose. The defendant is third party to the suit property and he has no right and interest either proprietary or possessory at any point of time.
OS.No.187/2020
3
4. It is submitted that on 06-09-2020 when the plaintiffs are greezing their cattle in the suit land, the defendant entered into the suit property from northern side and tried to occupy some extent, but the plaintiffs timely went there and stopped his illegal acts and drove away him. While going back the defendant made a caution that he will come again within one or two days with support of unsocial elements and certainly occupy part of suit property. In the circumstances the plaintiffs have no other alternative except to approach this Hon’ble Court for grant of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their heirs, agents, servants and workmen from occupying with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff in and over the suit property.
5. Defendant is set ex-parte.
6.In support of the case of the plaintiff, the plaintiff himself examined as
PW-1 and she produced Ex. A-1 to Ex. A-15.
7.Heard arguments of learned counsel for plaintiff and perused the record.
8. Now the point for determination is: - “Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for the relief as prayed for?”
P O I N T: Plaintiff examined himself as PW-1 according to his evidence plaintiff’s no.1 to 3 are own brothers and sons of Late Nandigoi Narsaiah. After the death of his father namely, Narsaiah, under Pouthi proceedings, the acquired land in suit survey no.354/AA1 to an extent of Ac.0-08gts apart from other non suit numbers, plaintiff no.2 acquired lands in suit survey nos.354/A1 to an extent of Ac.0-08gts in survey no.355/AA2 to an extent of Ac.0-03gts, in survey no.380/EE2 to an extent of Ac.0-25gts and in sy.no.381/U2 to an extent of Ac.0- 33gts apart from other non suit survey numbers. Similarly, the plaintiff no.3 acquired lands in suit sy.no.354/U to an extent of Ac.0-20gts in sy.no.355/AA2 to an extent of Ac.0-03gts in sy.no.380/E2 to an extent of Ac.0-25gts and in sy.no.381/AA2 to an extent of Ac.0-33gts apart from other non suit survey
OS.No.187/2020
4 numbers totally admeasuring Ac.3-38gts which are dry cum wet lands situated at
Kakkireni village of Ramannapet Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir District. Now that the defendant without having any6 right or title over the suit schedule property they are trying to interfere with the possession of the plaintiffs.
In pursuance of the said malafide intention the defendant came to the suit schedule lands on 06-09-2020 and quarreled with Plaintiff and threatened her with dire consequences and claimed the suit schedule property. But however they resisted their illegal attempts with great difficulty with the help of his family members and well-wishers. The defendants while going back threatened Plaintiff to occupy the suit lands at any time in future by mustering the strength of unsocial elements.
In order to substantiate the contention of plaintiff, the plaintiff PW1 is examined and Ex.A1 to Ex.A15 marked. Ex.A-1 is the Original Pattadar Pass
Book cum title deed vide document no.TS30130110792, dated: 29-04-2018 of plaintiff no.1. Ex.A-2 is the Meeseva 1-B Namuna (ROR), dated: 05-09-2020.
Ex.A-3 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2018. Ex.A-4 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2019. Ex.A-5 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2020. Ex.A-6 is the original digital pattadar pass book cum title deed bearing No.TS3013011098,
dated: 04-05-2018 of plaintiff no.2. Ex.A-7 is the Meeseva 1-B Namuna (ROR),
dated: 05-09-2020. Ex.A-8 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2018. Ex.A-9 is the
Meeseva Pahani for the year 2019. Ex.A-10 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2020. Ex.A-11 is the Original Digital Pattadar Pass Book cum title deed bearing
No.TS30130110097, dated: 04-05-2018 of plaintiff no.3. Ex.A-12 is the Meeseva 1-B Namuna (ROR), dated: 05-09-2020. Ex.A-13 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2018. Ex.A-14 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2019. Ex.A-15 is the
Meeseva Pahani for the year 2020.
On perusal of Ex. A-1 to Ex. A-15, it is evident that Plaintiffs are the
OS.No.187/2020
5 absolute owners and possessors of the Suit Schedule Properties. The Defendant did not appear in this suit and they did not put forth any defense as being proclaimed that the Suit Schedule Property belongs to them. From the evidence of PW1 it is clear that the defendant interfered with the possession of the plaintiff over the Suit
Schedule Property as such, such interference is treated as unlawful because they failed to contest the suit. When one party asserts something against another on oath and when the other party does not choose to appear before the court to disprove the same, the presumption is that there is truth in the statement made by the first party.
In the present case in hand the plaintiff made certain allegations against defendants stating that they are interfering with the possession, when the defendants received the summons, it is their responsibility to come before the court and defend the suit but they failed to file written statement. In these circumstances the evidence of
PW1 is stood unrebutted and unchallenged therefore the suit is liable to be decreed.
IN THE RESULT, the suit is decreed in part with cost. Issue perpetual injunction in favour of the Plaintiffs restraining the Defendant and their men from interfering with the Plaintiff’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Suit
Schedule Property.
(Typed to my dictation, to Sri T.Saikumar Yadav, Stenographer corrected and pronounced by me in `the open Court on this the 08th day of July, 2022).
Prl.Junior Civil Judge, Ramannapet
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
(Witnesses examined)
For Plaintiffs:- For Defendant:-
PW-1: Nadigoti Sathaiah - Nil -
EXHIBITS MARKED
For Plaintiff:-
Ex.A-1 is the Original Pattadar Pass Book cum title deed vide document no.TS30130110792, dated: 29-04-2018 of plaintiff no.1.
OS.No.187/2020
6
Ex.A-2 is the Meeseva 1-B Namuna (ROR), dated: 05-09-2020.
Ex.A-3 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2018.
Ex.A-4 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2019.
Ex.A-5 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2020.
Ex.A-6 is the original digital pattadar pass book cum title deed bearing No.TS3013011098, dated: 04-05-2018 of plaintiff no.2.
Ex.A-7 is the Meeseva 1-B Namuna (ROR), dated: 05-09-2020.
Ex.A-8 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2018.
Ex.A-9 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2019.
Ex.A-10 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2020.
Ex.A-11 is the Original Digital Pattadar Pass Book cum title deed bearing No.TS30130110097, dated: 04-05-2018 of plaintiff no.3.
Ex.A-12 is the Meeseva 1-B Namuna (ROR), dated: 05-09-2020.
Ex.A-13 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2018.
Ex.A-14 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2019.
Ex.A-15 is the Meeseva Pahani for the year 2020.
For Defendants: -Nil-
Prl.Junior Civil Judge, Ramannapet.
OS.No.187/2020