MARIMUTHU GOUNDAN Vs. THAMBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises from the decree in a suit in ejectment. The first defendant is the appellant.

(2.) The plaintiff's case was that he obtained title to the properties under a partition deed, Ext. C and that the defendants trespassed on the properties in 1953. He sued for recovery of possession of the properties with mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 1,800/- per annum from 30-3-1953. The first defendant denied the alleged trespass and contended that he was in possession of the properties under a lease granted by the plaintiff's mother and grandfather during the plaintiff's minority. He also claimed compensation for improvements made by him. The court below decreed the suit allowing recovery of possession with mesne profits and directing the plaintiff to pay a sum of Rs. 505-10-0 to the first defendant as value of improvements. The first defendant has preferred the appeal from the decree and the plaintiff has filed a memorandum of cross objections, objecting to the decree awarding compensation for improvements.

(3.) A few facts which are admitted by both sides may be stated: The plaintiff is the son of Kanthaswamy Goundan. His father Perumal Goundan was the original owner of the properties. The properties were sold in execution of a decree against Perumal Goundan, who was at that time in jail, and were purchased by the decree holder Subramonia Iyer who assigned the same to Perumal Goundan's wife Marakkal and son Kanthaswamy. After Perumal Goundan returned from jail, Marakkal gave an assignment of her rights to Perumal Gouadan.