KANNAN Vs. PREMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Defendants/appellants 1 to 3, who lost their case before both the courts below, have filed this Second Appeal. During the pendency of this Second Appeal, since the 1st Appellant died, his legal heirs are brought on records as the Appellants 4 to 6 herein.

(2.) The case of the Plaintiff/Respondent is as follows:- a. The suit property comprised in S.No.152/1 of Thiruthuraipoondi Town and the site of the suit property belonged to the Thiruthuraipoondi Arulmigu Bhavaoushadeeswarar Swami Tirukoil and the Plaintiff acquired the suit property under the sale deed dated 14.6.1991 and from that date, the Plaintiff has been in possession and enjoyment of the same and the husband of the Plaintiff died before four years and the 3rd Defendant is the first wife of the husband of the Plaintiff and the Defendants 2 and 3 are the sons through 3rd Defendant and since the Defendants trespassed into the suit property on 15.10.1995, the present suit has been filed.

(3.) The case of the Defendants is as follows:- a. The sale deed dated 14.6.1991 as alleged by the Plaintiff is not true and the Plaintiff in no way connected with the suit property. The Plaintiff has not purchased any property and in the suit property, the husband of the Plaintiff was running a Sweet Stall for more than 30 years. A sale agreement dated 9.4.91 was executed by the Vendor Krishnamurthy in favour of Jayaraman, the husband of the Plaintiff and an advance amount of Rs.40,000/- was received from the husband of the Plaintiff and before the execution of the sale deed, he died on 20.5.1991 and the balance amount was paid by the 3rd Defendant. But, with the help of the 1st Defendant, the sale deed was executed in favour of the Plaintiff and it is a benami transaction and hence, the Plaintiff is not entitled to recover possession of the suit property and the Defendants are the owners of the suit property and they had no knowledge about OS.No.432/91 and hence, the Judgement and Decree if any made in the said suit will not bind the Defendants and the contention of the Plaintiff that he is the second wife Jayaraman is not true and after the demise of the husband of the Plaintiff, the Defendants have been running the shop and they are not trespassers and Hence, the suit is not maintainable in law and the same is liable to be dismissed.