KADIRVEL Vs. KRISHNASWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful plaintiff before the courts below has filed the second appeal aggrieved over the judgment and decree passed by the learned II Additional District Judge, Trichirapalli in A.S.No.129 of 1993, whereby the dismissal of the suit was confirmed.

(2.) The case of the appellant, in brief, is as follows: The appellant is the plaintiff and respondents 1 to 5 are the defendants before the trial court. The plaintiff, Kadirvel filed a suit in O.S.No.17 of 1989 on the file of Sub Court, Ariyalur, for a declaration of his right and title over the suit properties and for recovery of possession of the same from the defendants and also for future mesne profits. The parties are related as under: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_261_AIR(MAD)_2011_1.html</FRM>

(3.) It is the further case of the plaintiff that during the pendency of the appeal, the said Manickathammal died and her husband Duraisamy was added as a party. The plaintiff filed a second appeal in S.A.No.205 of 1951 before this Court and this Court gave a finding that the mother of the plaintiff Muthammal and Meenakshi Ammal, the mother of Manickathammal, should enjoy the properties till their lifetime and thereafter, the properties should revert back to the heirs of the original testator. Accordingly, Muthammal and Meenakshi Ammal were enjoying their respective share of the properties and on 12.10.1985 the said Meenakshi Ammal died. Thereafter, Muthammal acquired all the properties and obtained absolute right and title over the same as heir at law to the original testator and she took possession of the suit properties. Muthammal executed a registered settlement deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the suit properties on 10.01.1986 and in pursuance of the same, except the plaintiff, no other person has right over the suit properties. During the life time of Meenakshi Ammal, she sold certain portions of suit properties to defendants 1 to 4 and executed a Will in favour of the 5th defendant, her grandson. When Meenakshi Ammal had no right and title to the suit properties, she cannot execute any sale deed or Will in respect of the suit properties in favour of the defendants and they were not valid and binding on the plaintiff, but defendants 1 to 4 (the purchasers of certain parts of properties from Meenakshi Ammal) and the 5th defendant took possession of the suit properties from him forcibly on 10.12.1986. Hence, the plaintiff filed the suit.