KARUPPAYAMMAL Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Plaintiff is the Appellant herein.

(2.) The suit was filed by the Plaintiff seeking for the relief of injunction stating that the suit property situate in S. No. 1103/, is a natham poramboke and the Plaintiff was employed under the second Defendant and during the employment, the Plaintiff was permitted to put up a hut in the suit property. Therefore, the Plaintiff had put up a construction and she is residing in the suit property and Door No. 95, was allotted to the suit property. After retirement of the Plaintiff, the Defendants are forcing her to vacate the suit property. The Plaintiff is in enjoyment of the suit property for more than 30 years and she has also prescribed title. The suit property is a village natham and the second Defendant has no right over the same, and therefore, the suit was filed for injunction.

(3.) The Defendants contested the suit stating that the suit property belonged to the second Defendant and the second Defendant permitted the Plaintiff to reside in the suit property and B memos were issued against the Plaintiff stating that the Plaintiff was only a permissive occupier and she cannot claim any right over the suit property and the Plaintiff can be evicted by the Defendant and therefore, the Plaintiff is not entitled to the relief prayed for.