UNION OF INDIA REP BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER HEAVY ALLOY PENETRATOR PROJECT Vs. REGISTRAR EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Second Appeal is filed by the 1 st Defendants Society against the judgment and Decree dated 24.3.2007 passed in A.S.No.10 of 2007 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Kovilpatti, Confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 27.1.2006 passed in O.S. Nos.307 of 2004 b y the learned District Munsif, Kovilpatti.

(2.) THE case of the Plaintiff, who is the 1 st Respondent herein, as set out in the Plaint is as follows: a. THE Suit Property and the other properties originally belonged to one Vannimuthu Pillai and his brother Arunachalam. THE suit property is measuring 84.5 cents comprised in S. No.42 of 6. On 7.10.1992, Arunachalam after receiving a sum of Rs.34,968/- executed a Release Deed in favour of Vannimuthu Pillai, who in turn under a Sale Deed dated 11.10.2000 sold 81.5 cents to Raveendran and Jeyanthi for a sale consideration of Rs.99,400/-. THEreafter, Raveendran executed a Release Deed dated 13.9.2002 in favour of Jeyanthi after receiving a sum of Rs.53, 255/-. Thus after Sub-division, the said Jeyanthi become the owner of the property measuring 82.5 cents comprised in S. No.42/6. On 18.6.2003, Jeyanthi executed a power of Attorney in favour of one Seenivasegam in respect the suit property. THE said Seenivasagam executed a Sale Deed in favour of the Plaintiff for sale consideration of Rs.2,30,000/-. Since then the Plaintiff has been in possession and enjoyment of the suit property. b. While so, it is alleged that at the time when the said Raveendran Worked in he 1 st Defendant Society, he misappropriated a sum of Rs.17,43,614.15/-. In the proceeding initiated by the Society for recovery of the amount misappropriated by Raveendran, an order of attachment was passed on 8.9.2003 by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kovilpatti, which was registered on 9.9.2003 by the Sub - Registrar of Kovilpatti. THE said Raveendran has no right, title or interest in the suit property in any manner and hence, the said order of attachment is not binding on the Plaintiff. Since, the Defendants are trying to alienate the suit property by way of auction. THE Suit has been filed for declaration that the suit property belongs to the Plaintiff and for the consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession of the Plaintiff over the suit property and for costs.

(3.) ON consideration of the oral as well as the documentary evidence, the Trial Court decreed the Suit and the Appeal filed as against the same filed by the 1 st Defendant Society was dismissed, confirming the Judgment and Decree of the Trial Court. As against the same, this Second Appeal has been filed by the 1 st Defendant Society.