RAMASAMY Vs. SELLAPERUMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Lis out of which captioned second appeal arises is now more than 12 years old (suit having been filed in the Court of first instance on 08.09.2008 by the appellant before this Court) and in less than three months from now age of the lis will be 13.

(2.) Plaintiff, who has succeeded in getting a decree qua all three limbs of plaint prayer except a small strip of land admeasuring less than 39 square meters in one limb of plaint prayer, is the appellant in the captioned second appeal. Lone 'appellant' and sole 'respondent' in the captioned second appeal shall hereinafter be referred to as 'plaintiff' and 'defendant' in this judgment (for the sake of convenience). As already mentioned supra, plaintiff filed a suit i.e., O.S.No.428 of 2008 on the file of 'II Additional District Munsif's Court, Virudhachalam' (hereinafter 'trial Court' for the sake of convenience) on 08.09.2008 with three limbs of prayer. The first limb is regarding declaration of title qua immovable property, the second limb is regarding removal of encroachment made by the defendant and the third limb is regarding permanent injunction qua possession of plaintiff's immovable property. Though obvious, for the sake of completion of facts, it is necessary to set out here that the usual residuary limb of prayer and one limb of prayer for costs also form part of the plaint prayer.

(3.) Defendant entered appearance, filed a written statement followed by an additional written statement which was met with a reply statement by the plaintiff. This completed the pleadings in trial Court, issues were framed by the trial Court and parties went to trial on the issues. Suffice to say that the predecessor-in-title for the plaintiff and defendant are common and the issue arises largely in this aspect of the matter.