G ARUMUGHAM Vs. M PALANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is focussed by the first defendant, animadverting upon the judgment and decree dated 28.02.2008 passed by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Chengalpattu in A.S.No.77 of 2003 reversing the judgment and decree dated 14.07.2003 passed by the learned District Munsif, Alandur in O.S.No.2838 of 1997.

(2.) THE parties are referred to here under according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court.

(3.) THE gist and kernel of the argument as put forth on the side of the first defendant/appellant would run thus: (i) THE appellate court was not justified in invoking Section 92 of the Indian Evidence Act placing reliance on the averments in Ex.A1 as the first defendant is a third party to the said sale deed and he is not claiming any right over the suit property contemplated under the said document. (ii) THE only contention of the first defendant was that the said document could be obtained by the plaintiff from him only on payment of the sale consideration paid by the first defendant along with the stamp duty, registration charges etc., incurred by him. (iii) THE relationship between the parties is an admitted one and because of the nearness of the relationship,the first defendant did choose to fund the sale consideration for the purchase of the suit property in the name of the plaintiff, with the understanding that after paying the sale consideration, he should take back the document. (iv) No doubt strained relationship erupted between them; whereupon the plaintiff did not pay the amount as agreed to be paid by him to the first defendant; wherefore alone the first defendant was constrained to retain the document. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the appellant/first defendant would pray for allowing the second appeal by setting aside the judgment and decree of the first appellate court in passing the judgment as under: