KARUPPA GOUNDER Vs. NANJAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal has been filed challenging the reversal findings of the lower appellate court by its judgment and decree dated 23.11.2006 passed in A.S.No.7 of 2006.

(2.) The Appellant is the defendant in the suit O.S.No.42 of 2002 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Avinashi. The suit was filed by the respondent/plaintiff seeking for a declaration that she is entitled to use the suit pathway and she has also sought for permanent injunction restraining the Appellant/defendant from interfering with her right to use the suit pathway. It is the case of the respondent/plaintiff that the suit property is a foot pathway and it is her case that her mother had purchased S.F.No.271 on 04.11.1955 under a registered sale deed along with the right to use the subject pathway which was latter settled in her favour under the settlement deed dated 10.01.2001. Hence, according to the respondent/plaintiff, under the aforementioned document, she is having the right to the usage of the suit pathway.

(3.) The case of the Appellant/defendant as seen from his written statement is that there is no such pathway in existence as pleaded by the respondent/plaintiff. It is the case of the Appellant/defendant that the respondent/plaintiff has all along been using the east-west passage lying on the south of their respective properties of the respondent/plaintiff and the Appellant/defendant to reach her suit property. According to the Appellant/defendant, the suit has been filed in respect of a non-existing foot path.