NARAYANAN Vs. RANGANATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant in this Second Appeal is the plaintiff in the suit. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the suit by the Trial Court and the Appeal by the First Appellate Court, the present Second Appeal is filed against the concurrent finding of the Courts below.

(2.) The case of the appellant as plaintiff in the original suit is that, the property described under 'B' schedule of the plaint originally belong to one Govinda Gounder S/o.Subburaya Gounder. He sold it to one Narayanasami S/o.Kuppa Padayachi under the registered sale deed dated 11.04.1944 and delivered the possession. The property was under the exclusive possession and enjoyment of the said Narayanasami, till his death. He died intestate leaving behind his daughter Govindammal as his sole heir. She took possession of the property and enjoying it absolutely putting up a house on the South of item No.1 of 'A' schedule properties. This is a portion of item No.1 in the 'B' schedule properties. The said Govindammal, died about 8 years prior to the filing of this suit. She left behind her husband and two sons to inherit the suit properties. Govindammal husband Periyasami and her two sons Ranganathan and Manibalan divided the property among themselves about 6 or 7 years prior to the suit. At that time, Govindammal second son Manibalan was still a minor. The Northern portion in item No.1 of share in item No.2 of 'B' schedule was allotted to the share of Periyasami and the minor son Manibalan. The southern portion in item No.1 and share in item No.2 of the 'B' schedule was allotted to Ranganathan. The share allotted to Periayasami and his son Manibalan is the 'A' schedule property in the suit. The 2nd item property in the pathway for common use of both the parties.

(3.) On 22.11.2000, Periyasami for himself and on behalf of his minor son Manibalan sold the 'A' schedule property for Rs.7,500/- to the plaintiff/appellant and put him in possession. After mutation of the revenue records, joint patta No.631 issued to the plaintiff/appellant. While the plaintiff/appellant enjoying the item No.1 of the 'A' schedule property exclusively and the item No.2, pathway jointly with other pattadars. The son of Periyasami, the defendant/respondent herein, disgruntled by the appellant purchasing his father's share, with a scheme to drive away the plaintiff/appellant attempted on 18.01.2006, to interfere his possession of 1 st item of the 'A' schedule property and exclude him from the item No.2 of 'A' schedule property. Hence, the suit for declaration of title in respect of item No.1 and share in item No.2 of the 'A' schedule property and for permanent injunction restraining the defendant/respondent from interfering with his exclusive possession of item No.1 and joint possession of item No.2 of the 'A' schedule properties. Or in alternate share in the item No.1 and item No.2 in the 'B' schedule properties.