SENGUTTUVAN Vs. ERASAPPA,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal is filed by the plaintiff against the dismissal of his suit for declaration and permanent injunction, concurrently by the Courts below.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff is that, his father Govindarasu, purchased 3 cents of land from one Anjaliammal on 19.09.1960. After the demise of Govindarasu, in the year 1978, his legal heirs entered into an oral partition on the nd day of Tamil month "Chitirai", 1980. Though, in the sale deed, the extent of the property is shown as 0.37 cents, in lay, it was 0.48 cents and same was in their possession and enjoyment. In the oral partition, the plaintiff was allotted 0.36 cents and balance 0.12 cents was shared equally by his brothers Radhakrishnan and Sivaramakrishnan. The revenue records are in their respective names and enjoyed without any let or hindrance. While so, the defendant setting up title upon them, trying to dispossess him. Hence, suit for declaration and permanent injunction was filed.

(3.) The case of the defendant is that, the claim of the plaintiff tracing title over the suit property through Anjaliammal is false and the claim that, in lay, the extent of property is 0.48 cents though title deed is only for 0.37 cents is an invented plea. The suit property is part of S.No.352/10 to extent of 3 acres 02 cents. The patta stands in the name of 8 persons jointly. Neither the name of the plaintiff nor their vendor Anjaliammal are Pattadars. The defendant is absolute owner of 1.88 acres of land in the said Survey Number, which they purchased through different persons. During UDR, the surveyor, by mistake, the revenue authorities have not shown the correct extent and boundaries. Knowing about that mistake, the plaintiff trying to stake claim over the defendant's property and extent over and above his title document. The UDR mutation was done behind his back without notice and it will not bind him. Hence, the suit has to be dismissed.