SATHI VILASINI Vs. JAYASREE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in O.S. No. 94 of 1996 on the file of Additional Sub Court, Palakkad is the appellant. The plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of possession on the strength of title. It is averred that the property originally belonged to one Kalyani, D/o.Kasi. The plaintiff purchased the same under Exhibit A1 registered assignment deed dated 22.11.2982. It is averred that the property situate on the western side of the 100 Feet Road proceeding to Malampuzha. It is further averred that the plaintiff was residing with her husband at Bombay and at that time the defendant-respondent trespassed into the property and reduced the same into her possession. Hence the suit for recovery of possession on the strength of title. The defendant-respondent entered appearance and filed a written statement contending that the appellant has no title or possession over the property described in the plaint. According to her, the property belonged to one A.K.Saradha, who sold the same to her under Exhibit B1 sale deed dated 22.3.1990. It is contended that after purchasing the property when she started construction, the suit was filed with mala fide intention.

(2.) A Commissioner was deputed, who filed Exhibit C1 (a) interim report and Exhibit C1 final report and Exhibit C1(b)plan. On the side of the plaintiff, her husband was examined as P.W.1. The defendant gave evidence as D.W.1. The Commissioner was examined as C.W.1. The learned Sub Judge found that the plaint description does not tally with the property covered by Exhibit A1 and dismissed the suit. Challenging that judgment and decree that the appeal is filed.

(3.) The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant though raised several contentions, ultimately pressed for a remand. It is submitted that the suit was dismissed on the sole ground that the description of the plaint schedule property does not tally with the description of the title deed relied on by the plaintiff. It is submitted that a perusal of the plan appended to the sale deed with Exhibit C1(b) plan would show that there is a mistake either in the plan appended to the sale deed or in the plan submitted by the Commissioner.