MURUGAN Vs. MANTHIRAPANDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Second Appeal has been filed against the common judgment and decree of the IVth Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, dated 19.11.2008, made in A.S.No.503 of 2007, confirming the judgment and decree of the XVIIIth Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, dated 22.12.2006, made in O.S.No.7568 of 1999. S.A.No.1133 of 2009: THE Second Appeal has been filed against the common judgment and decree of the IVth Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, dated 19.11.2008, made in A.S.No.625 of 2007, confirming the judgment and decree of the XVIIIth Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, dated 22.12.2006, made in O.S.No.7770 of 1999.

(2.) THE plaintiffs in the suit, in O.S.No.7568 of 1999, are the respondents in the second appeal, in S.A.No.1132 of 2009. THE suit in O.S.No.7568 of 1999, had been filed praying for a judgment and decree against the defendant in the said suit, who is the appellant in the second appeal for granting a permanent injunction restraining him and others persons acting on his behalf from, in any manner, interfering with the plaintiffs' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule mentioned property.

(3.) IN the plaint filed in O.S.No.7568 of 1999, it has been stated that the suit schedule property is part of a larger extent of the land, which had belonged to one Narasimlu Reddiar. He had purchased the said property from one Duraiswamy Reddiar, on 20.5.1922. Narasimlu Reddiar had sold the property measuring 0.14.4 kanies in favour of Pappaammal, under a sale deed, dated 25.11.1937. An extent of 14 cents had been purchased from Pappaammal by one Venkata Subbiah, on 28.8.1982. The plaintiffs had purchased the suit property measuring 3388 sq.ft. of land under two separate sale deeds, dated 14.12.1998 and 16.12.1998. The plaintiffs had been in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property from the date of its purchase, as the absolute owners. While so, the plaintiffs had raised a compound wall all around their plot after obtaining the necessary approval and the sanctioned plan from the Corporation of Chennai, on 22.11.1999. Since the defendant in the suit and his men were threatening the plaintiffs stating that they would demolish the compound wall constructed by the plaintiffs, they had filed the suit, in O.S.No.7568 of 1999, on the file of the XVIIIth Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.