THANAMMA Vs. RAMASWAMI PILLAI VELAYUDHAN PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal has been preferred by the Defendant against the decree passed in this case by the lower appellate Court upholding Plaintiff's claim to the possession of the suit property and also restraining the Defendant by a permanent injunction from entering upon the property. The suit was instituted by the Plaintiff essentially as a title suit and the primary relief claimed was for a declaration that the title to the property was with him and that he was in possession of the property in his own right. According to him the property was obtained by his predecessor -in -interest under a mortgage more than a century back and that by efflux of time the mortgage right ripened into full ownership.

(2.) REGARDING the mortgage set up by the Plaintiff the necessary details were not disclosed by the Plaintiff in the plaint or in his replication beyond slating that it was more than a century old. At the evidence stage, Ext. L, dated 17 -9 -1041 was put forward as the plaint mortgage executed in favour of the Plaintiff's ancestor. Both the lower Courts have concurrently found that Ex. L is a spurious document and that the mortgagee under that mortgage did not come into possession of the property on the strength of it.

(3.) IN the result this appeal is allowed and in reversal of the decree of the lower appellate Court, the trial Court's decree dismissing the suit is restored. Defendant will get her costs throughout from the Plaintiff. Respondent's objection memorandum is dismissed with costs.