NATARAJAN Vs. CHETTINAD CEMENT CORPORATION LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in O.S.No.370 of 2008 has come forward with this second appeal, challenging the dismissal of the suit for declaration of title and consequential permanent injunction.

(2.) According to the plaintiff, the suit property was allotted to his father at a partition that took place in the family on 21.05.1965. After the death of his father in 1991, the plaintiff's mother took the minor children to Iluppaikkorai Village where she continious to live even as the date of filing of the suit. It is only during the year 2007, when the plaintiff came to supervise the suit property, he found that Patta has been transferred in the name of the 3rd parties. He took immediate steps to verify the transfers. He, therefore, filed an application to re-transfer the Patta in his name. At the enquiry held in the Tahsildar's office, the plaintiff was directed to approach the Civil Court. Hence, according to the plaintiff, he has came up with the suit for declaration of his title and for injunction. The plaintiff has expressly stated that he is also suing on behalf of his mother and brother who are the other co-shares.

(3.) The defendant resisted the suit contending that the plaintiff's claim is stale. According to the defendant, though the suit properties were divided among the children of Chinnasamy Moppanar under the partition dated 21.05.1965, there was no division by meets and bounds of the suit property as it was a lake (Vup). The defendant would claim that one of the brothers of the plaintiff's father, Rajamanickam claimed that the partition of the year 1965 was not complete and the plaintiff's father and himself, for convenient enjoyment, divided the properties orally amongst themselves in 1984. According to the defendant, in the said oral partition, an extent of 1.61.5 hectares in Survey No.312/1A was allotted to Rajamanickam and the plaintiff's father was allotted other properties in Survey No.312/2B and Survey No.312/3B. It is claimed that the plaintiff's father for himself and on behalf of the plaintiff sold those properties on 01.10.1986. Similarly, on 10.09.1986, Rajamanickam sold 3.17 acres in Survey No.312/1 out of 4.10 acres to one Chinnathambi and others. On 18.07.1984, one Kaliyaperumal sold 0.33 cents out of 4.10 acres to one Nagammal. The defendant purchased the said land on 18.01.2006 and 19.02.2007. Therefore, according to the defendants from 18.07.1984 and 10.09.1986 this defendant and his predecessors in title have been enjoying the suit properties. On the said contention, the defendant sought for dismissal of the suit. It was also claimed that the right of the plaintiff is extinguished by ouster.