injunction, the claim is based on a gift deed dated 24.01.2012 said to have been executed in favour of the plaintiff Srivalli by her mother Dhanalaxmi supra. So far as O.S.No.39 of 2011 injunction suit of Y.P.Reddy etc., concerned is for only S.No.145 of Khanapuram for an extent of 1687.75 square yards. So far as O.S.No.46 of 2011 concerned, that is for S.Nos.141, 142, 144, 145 of Khanapuram for an extent of 1728.25 square yards. Similarly 1797 square yards is the extent in the other injunction suit O.S.No.180 of 2013 for part of the survey numbers among 141 to 145 or 146 of Khanapuram out of the total extent. Once such is the case and the suit for declaration and injunction is for the comprehensive relief and the other three suits are for injunction relief and most of the parties are common in all the suits, to avoid conflict of judgments, to sub-serve the ends of justice and that too when sought for it is just for the trial court to record common evidence in all the suits by directing the sole plaintiff of O.S.No.144 of 2012 to commence the trial with respect to her claim and also that of her mother along with her for all the four suits for recording in the main suit O.S.No.144 of 2017. Needful to say, any chief affidavit in any suit if filed viz., in O.S.Nos.39 and 46 supra of one of the plaintiffs if not taken on oath to ignore and if taken on oath to consider as chief affidavit by recording further chief examination for common evidence in ‘D’ series, after evidence of plaintiff Srivalli in O.S.No.144 of 2017 and her mother as
