THANIGAIVEL Vs. GOVINDARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE first defendant, who lost in both the Courts belowis the appellant herein.

(2.) THE first respondent filed the suit for the relief of declaration and for recovery of possession. THE case of the first respondent was that one Mr.Goda Narayana Iyer, was the original owner of vast extent of land and in the family partition, as evidenced by koorrchit dated 01.07.1957, one of his sons by name G.Viswanathan, got 7.3 acres of land in S.No.199/2, 1 acre and 7 cents of land in S.No.200/1, 1 acre and 39 cents of land in S.No.199, 87 cents of land in S.No.197, 36 cents of land in S.No.120/1, 18 cents of land in S.No.119, and 1 acre and 42 cents of land in S.No.1/18/2 of Kerambakkam Village.

(3.) THE appellant contested the suit stating that Mrs.Thangam Thanunathan, had no right to sell 3 " cents of property and submitted that 36 cents of land in S.No.120/1 of Kerambakkam Village belonged to one V.R.Muthu and he purchased the same under the sale deed dated 12.11.1982 from G.Viswanathan, the son of Mr.Goda Narayana Iyer and the said V.R.Muthu, executed a general power of attorney in favour of one Lakshmi and on the basis of the power of attorney, the said Lakshmi, sold various extent of property and sold plot No.117 to the appellant under a sale deed dated 22.5.2001 and eversince from the date of sale, the appellant is in enjoyment of the suit property. Hence, the first respondent is not entitled to the decree of declaration and recovery of possession.