SAJI Vs. ALEYAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FIRST defendant is the son of the respondent/plaintiff. 2nd defendant is the wife of the first defendant. The property originally belonged to the father of the first appellant herein. A partition was entered into on 23.6.2001, as per which item No.1 in that partition deed was allotted to the mother (plaintiff). As the first defendant is her son, he was permitted to reside in that house. When the plaintiff demanded the appellants to vacate the house, they did not heed to that request. Hence, the mother had to file the suit.

(2.) THOUGH so many contentions were raised before the trial court, it was found by the trial court that the parties are bound by Ext.A1. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that since the appellants have been in possession of the house for about 10 years, the suit for mandatory injunction is not maintainable. According to the learned counsel, the plaintiff should have sought recovery of possession of the plaint schedule property on the strength of title.

(3.) LEARNED counsel now makes an earnest request that the appellants may be granted six months time to vacate the premises. This request is strongly opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff pointing out that the court below was inclined to grant three months time but the appellants have not vacated the premises. It is further pointed out that the respondent/plaintiff is an aged lady and that it is her earnest desire to stay in her own house obtained as per the partition deed. There is no bonafides in the request made by the appellants.