R. JAYACHANDRAN Vs. MOHAMED SIRAJUDEEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in O.S.No.16 of 2008, whose suit for permanent injunction was dismissed by the trial Court, upon confirmation of the said dismissal by the lower appellate Court, has come up with the second appeal.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff as projected before the trial Court is that the suit property belonged to one Mohammad Muneerdhin, who happens to be the senior paternal uncle of defendants 1 and 2. It is claimed that the maternal great grand mother of the plaintiff viz., one Nallammal was a cultivating tenant under the said Mohammad Muneerdhin and she was registered as a tenant in the year 1969. It is the further claim of the plaintiff that the said Nallammal died in the year 1979, leaving behind her only daughter Ayakkal, who was cultivating the property as a cultivating tenant. The said Ayakkal died leaving behind the plaintiff's father Raju Thevar. The plaintiff's father Raju Thevar was cultivating the property as a tenant and after his death, the plaintiff doing cultivation in the property and therefore, the plaintiff being the cultivating tenant is in possession of the property.

(3.) The suit is resisted by the defendants contending that though Nallammal was the tenant, upon her death, his daughter Ayakkal was cultivating the property and after the death of Ayakkal, Chellammal, D/o. Ayakkal was cultivating the property as a tenant, Chellammal's son Ravichandran had executed a deed relinquishing his tenancy over the property. It was also the contention of the defendants that the plaintiff was never in possession of the property as a cultivating tenant and therefore, he is not entitled to injunction. It is also contended that the defendants 1 and 2 have sold the property to the third defendant Murugan. The said Murugan had in turn sold the property to the fourth defendant Malathi under the sale deed dated 18.07.2007. Since Murugan died pending suit, the defendants 5 to 7 being his legal heirs were impleaded in the suit.