SMT. NARASAMMA Vs. M. JAVARAYEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) No question of law, much less, a substantial question of law arises for consideration in this Second Appeal. Plaintiff's suit for possession of property into which defendants had trespassed, has been decreed. Incidentally, Court has declared his title.

(2.) The plaint averments were that the plaintiff came to purchase the suit schedule property from defendant-1 (who died during pendency of the suit) and who was the allottee of the site on which some sheds were erected. Plaintiff further pleaded that he was residing in the sheds till one of them collapsed. Thereupon he abandoned the other shed also, lived elsewhere and took steps to put up proper construction at which point of time, defendant-1 trespassed and took possession of the shed forcing the plaintiff to recover possession of the property which he had purchased and into which defendant-1 had trespassed.

(3.) The defence put up was such that it was admitted, defendant-1 had sold the property. He was given two squares and the allotment in his favour had not been confirmed by the Government. Therefore, he had no title to pass it on to the plaintiff-purchaser. He has also pleaded that the Municipality which had allotted the site was a necessary party. It was contended that a suit for possession without seeking declaration of title was not maintainable. The trial Court, after framing necessary issues, which were as follows: