N.K. RAMACHANDRAN Vs. T.B. SUNIL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four appeals raise a common question and hence being considered together and are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The appellants are the defendants in a suit for recovery of possession and a permanent prohibitory injunction. The plaint schedule property was purchased by the plaintiff by virtue of sale deed No.2819/1998 of SRO Puthencurz. Originally the property belonging to one Karuthedathu Yohannan, who had mortgaged the property for receiving a chitty amount from Thrissivaperoor Social Welfare Centre Kuri Unit, hereinafter called as the chitty company. In 1987, the company filed a suit and obtained a decree charged on the plaint schedule property. E.P No.271/1989 was filed before the Sub Court, Paravur, in which the schedule property was auctioned and the chitty company purchased the plaint schedule property and the sale was confirmed on 7/11/1990. Thereafter, the company obtained delivery of the property in a fresh proceeding as E.P No.63/1991. Subsequently, the plaint schedule property was sold to the plaintiff by the chitty company. Later, when defendants 1 and 2 tried to trespass into the property, plaintiff filed O.S No.298/1999 seeking injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing into the plaint schedule property. Finding that the plaintiff was divested of the possession of the suit property, the said suit was withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh suit and hence the present suit.

(3.) On 10/10/2013, this Court admitted the appeal and framed the following substantial questions of law for considerations:-