JAMILA BEEVI Vs. K MARIAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is filed by the Plaintiff against the judgment and decree made in A.S. No. 113 of 2002, on the file of the Principal Sub-Court, Dindigul, dated 18.09.2003 thereby setting aside the judgment and decree, dated 28.08.2001 of the trial court in O.S. No. 133 of 2009, on the file of the District Munsif, Nilakkottai and remanding the suit for fresh disposal to the court.

(2.) The parties are for the purpose of convenience, named as per their rank in the suit.

(3.) The Plaintiff filed the suit in O.S. No. 133 of 1996 for declaring the Plaintiff's title over the suit property and for restraining the Defendants from interfering with the Plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the suit properties consisting of two items(1) S. No. 48/5-42 cents and (2)S. No. 52/3-1.22 acres, punja lands in Kanmaipatti village, Nilakkottai District. According to the Plaintiff, the property originally belonged to the Plaintiff's father having purchased the same under Ex.A1-Registered sale deed from one Chinnamuthu Rowther and since the date of purchase, the Plaintiff's father had been in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the property and after his death in 1930, the Plaintiff and his brothers inherited the same and the suit properties are in the partition under Ex.A2, partition deed, dated 22.05.1969 allotted to the share of the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff since that date has been in exclusive possession by paying kists and she has also by such long, continuous and open possession and enjoyment of the same prescribed title by adverse possession and her right, title and interest is sought to be interfered with by the Defendants without any right or interest to do so. The first Defendant died during the pendency of the suit. The suit is seriously contested by the second Defendant, who is none else than the daughter of the first Defendant. According to the second Defendant, the suit property originally belonged to one Paramasamy, from whom the father of the deceased first Defendant and the grand-father of the second Defendant purchased the same on 22.07.1948 under Ex.B1-Registered sale deed and since the date of such purchase, the same has been in possession and enjoyment of the Defendant's family members. The further case of the second Defendant is that though the correct survey number of the suit item is S. No. 52/3, it is wrongly mentioned as S. No. 51/1 in Ex.B1-sale deed, but the survey number is correctly mentioned in Ex. B3-Patta and other subsequent documents such as chitta, adangal and kist receipts and other mortgage deeds relating to the suit property and the Plaintiff has been by taking advantage of the error crept in mentioning the survey number in Ex.B1-sale deed, claiming wrongful right over the suit property. The parties have in support of their respective claim examined the Plaintiff and the Defendant as P.W.1 and D.W.1 and produced Ex.A1 to Ex.A13 and Ex.B1 to Ex.B19 documents.