RAMAN MENON Vs. GOPALAKRISHNA NAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals arise respectively from two connected suits between the same parties,O.S.14 of 1125 and O.S.36 of 1950 on the file of the Trichur District Court.The common plaintiff is the appellant in both the appeals.The common defendant is similarly the respondent.Of these suits O.S.36 of 1950 was the earlier instituted,having been O.S.673 of 1124 on the file of the Wadakkancherry Munsiff's Court before its transfer to the Trichur District Court and renumbering there,for purpose of joint trial with O.S.14 of 1125.As this later suit O.S.14 is more comprehensive,we will refer to the facts with reference to it.

(2.) THE plaintiff is the karnavan and manager of the Kariottu Kalathil tarwad in Talappilli Taluk,in Cochin.The plaint schedule item 1 to 20 consisting of wet lands appertained to this tarwad.The tarwad is an ancient aristocratic one having considerable properties some in direct possession and others,outstanding with tenants.The items 1 to 20 referred to above belonged originally to this latter category having been entrusted to Raman Naidu deceased,under Verumpattom arrangement.On the death of this Raman Naidu in or about 1103,his wife Lekshmi was continued as verumpattomdar in his place.On 15 -9 -1108,Lekshmi executed an unregistered lease deed filed in the case as Ext.F in favour of the plaintiff,in respect of these items 1 to 20 undertaking to pay a pattom of 255 paras according to the plaintiff's mudrapara and certain perquisities besides,per year.Item 21 which lay adjacent to these items 1 to 20 was purchased by the plaintiff in two halves from Lekshmi and her coowner under Exts.G and H of 1113 and 1115 and entrusted to Lekshmi herself under Verumpattom along with the items 1 to 20.She was to pay 60 paras more under this arrangement.

(3.) THE plaint averred that after the Viruppu harvest in Kanni 1124 the defendant applied to and obtained from the plaintiff,a small plot about 56 cents of Jnal land in the southern most portion of items 1 to 21 for purposes of cultivating vegitables for his own purposes on condition of its return in time for the normal paddy cultivation at the next crop.The defendant contrary to his undertaking planted banana also on the land and so failed to make the land available.He went further and attempted to cultivate the rest of the properties in items 1 to 21 without plaintiff's permission.It was then,on 29 -8 -1124 that the plaintiff filed his suit O.S.673 of 1124 of the Wadakkancherry Munsiff's Court for permanent injunction to restrain the defendant from entering into the properties,items 1 to 21.Along with the suit,the plaintiff made interlocutory motion for injunction pending suit.Notice returnable on the reopening of the court after midsummer recess,on 25 -10 -1124 was alone ordered.Taking advantage of the situation,the defendant completed his trespass and effectually occupied the entire block of items 1 to 21 during the interval by 5 - 9 -1124 and followed it up by filing written statement on 8 -12 -1124,repudiating the surrender by Lekshmi in 1118 and his caretakership thereafter as alleged by the plaintiff.On the other hand,according to him,he had taken sublease from Lekshmi on 1 -7 -1114 as regards items 1 to 20 and had been from that time duly discharging the plaintiff's dues of 255 paras until 1124.As regards item 21,he personally was the direct lessee of the plaintiff for a rent liability of 45 paras.His possession was therefore no way wrongful and the injunction suit was uncalled for.