PUTHU PERUNGALATHUR GRAMA Vs. SIKAMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.T. Girish Sridharan, learned counsel for the appellant and perused and examined the materials and evidence available on record.

(2.) This Second Appeal has been filed challenging the concurrent findings of the Courts below.

(3.) The appellant is the plaintiff in the suit O.S. No.2680 of 1993 on the file of the District Munsif Court at Tambaram. The respondents are the defendants 2 and 3 in the said suit. The suit was filed for permanent injunction restraining the respondents / defendants from tresspassing into the suit property and interfering with the appellant's / plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment. The appellant / plaintiff claims that they are the absolute owner of the suit schedule property and the defendants are attempting to tresspass into the same. However, it is a case of the respondents/ defendants 2 and 3 that the appellant / plaintiff -Sangam is a non existent Association. According to the respondents/ defendants, the plaintiff-Sangam have no right or interest in the suit schedule property and they are not entitled to file the suit.