S MAHADEVAN Vs. S NETHAJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter is taken up for hearing through Video-Conferencing. The defendants in OS No.92 of 2010 have come up with this Appeal challenging a decree for permanent injunction granted by the Trial Court in OS No.92 of 2010 and affirmed by the first Appellate Court in AS No.14 of 2017.

(2.) The plaintiffs sued for injunction contending that the suit properties originally belonged to their father Samy Chengaiah, who was in possession of the same till his life-time and after his death the suit first item is held by the plaintiffs jointly with the other heirs of Samy Chengaiah. As far as items 2 to 4 are concerned the other legal heirs of Samy Chengaiah, have released their rights in favour of the first plaintiff under a Release Deed dated 01.09.2009 registered as Document No.2413 of 2009. It is also the case of the plaintiffs that as regards items 5 and 6 which were purchased by their father in the year 1991 all the legal heirs had released their share in the said properties in favour of the second plaintiff vide Release Deed dated 01.09.2009. Claiming that the defendants attempted to interfere with their possession during the year 2010, the plaintiffs came up with the above suit.

(3.) The suit was resisted by the defendants contending that Samy Chengaiah, even during his life-time, had agreed in writing to sell the suit properties to them and received a sum of Rs.88,070/- on 07.07.1994, it was also stated that the Sale Agreement fructified into a sale letter on 24.12.1994. The said document is said to have been executed by Samy Chengaiah for himself and on behalf of his minor sons. It is claimed by the defendants that after the sale letter, the defendants had planted mango saplings had developed a complete mango grove. The plaintiffs taking advantage of the non-registration of the sale document are now attempting to grab the property which was sold by their father.