CHANDRAKUMAR Vs. NARAYANAN BAHULEYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant in O.S.No.882 of 1991 on the file of the court of the First Additional Munsiff, Neyyattinkara, who succeeded in the suit, but lost in A.S. No. 1151 of 1994, Sub Court, Neyyattinkara, is the appellant.

(2.) THE suit was filed by the respondents for declaration of title and possession over the plaint schedule property, for injunction and for fixation of boundary. According to the plaintiffs, the plaint schedule property belonged to Raghava Panicker as per Exhibit A-2 partition deed of the year 1950. Raghava Panicker and his wife Ammukutty executed Exhibit A-l settlement deed dated 6-2-1974 in favour of the plaintiffs, who are respectively their son-in-law and daughter. THE plaint schedule property is item No.2 in Exhibit A-1 settlement deed. THE property of the defendant lies on the southern side of the plaint schedule property. In Exhibit A-1, the extent of the property is shown as 5.67 Ares. In the plaint schedule, the extent was shown as 17.5 cents which was later amended as 18.5 cents. THE plaintiffs alleged that on 27-10-1991, the defendant tried to demolish the southern boundary and to trespass upon the plaint schedule property.

(3.) THE trial court dismissed the suit on the following grounds :