C A JOSEPH Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF in O.S No.1676 of 2004 of the First Additional Munsiff Court, Ernakulam is aggrieved by the dismissal of that suit as confirmed by the learned First Additional District Judge, Ernakulam in A.S No.167 of 2009.

(2.) THE suit was originally laid against respondents 1 to 3 for a declaration that appellant/plaintiff has perfected title over the suit property, described as 2.85 cents in Survey No.944/6 by adverse possession and the law of limitation and for consequential injunction. Appellant claimed that his father was in possession of the suit property from 1954 onwards and after the death of the father, he is in possession and enjoyment of the said property. He has reclaimed a portion of the suit property and planted coconut saplings.

(3.) THE trial court referring to the contentions raised by respondents 4 to 7 as to their right through the suit property, observed that it is not necessary to go into that question since the claim of the appellant is only for a declaration of title on the strength of adverse possession and for injunction. The trial court held that the appellant failed to prove his case that he has perfected title by adverse possession and hence no relief could be granted to the appellant. The trial court also noticed that though extent of the suit property stated in the plaint schedule is 2.85 cents, the Advocate Commissioner in Exts.C2 and C2(a) has reported the puramboke thodu as having an extent of 4 cents. The trial court also observed that the appellant did not take steps to amend the plaint in accordance with Ext.C2(a)