KATHIRUMMAL CHIRAMMAL KARTHYAYANI Vs. KUNNOOL BALAKRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant is the appellant. The suit O.S. No. 74/1998 was filed for fixation of the western boundary of the plaint schedule property. The aforesaid suit was tried along with O.S. No. 6/1998. There, the appellant was the plaintiff, but the defendant was stated to be the respondent's brother's son. The Trial Court granted a decree in O.S. No. 6/1998 against the defendant therein. The suit O.S. No. 74/1998 filed by the respondent for fixation of boundary was dismissed. Evidence was recorded in O.S. No. 6/1998. The appellant herein was examined as PW 1 and Exts. A1, A2 and A2(a) were marked. Exts. B1, B2 and B2(a) were marked on the side of the respondents herein. The Commissioners report and plan were marked as Exts. C1 to C6. The 1st respondent was examined as DW 2 and the defendant in O.S. No. 6/1998 was examined as DW 1.

(2.) No appeal was filed by the defendant in O.S. No. 6/1998. But, that will not in any way affect the case of the appellant or the respondents in this case.

(3.) The Trial Court dismissed O.S. No. 74/1998. The plaintiff therein filed appeal. The Appellate Court reversed the finding of the Trial Court and granted a decree in favour of the respondents. The western boundary of the respondents property was fixed along 'EF' line shown in Ext. C6 plan.