SELVAM ESTATES Vs. L THANGAPANDIA MAHARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above suit was filed by the applicant/plaintiff praying for a judgment and decree: (a) declaring that the plaintiff firm is the absolute owner of the property described in the schedule; (b) granting a consequential injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with plaintiff's peaceful possession of the schedule mentioned property and for costs.

(2.) LATER the plaint was amended as per orders dated 19.12.1990, made in Application No.6803of 1990 seeking a relief for a mandatory injunction directing defendants 3 to 5 demolish the superstructure put up on the plaint schedule property after filing the suit directing defendants 3 to 5 to deliver the vacant possession of the property to the plaintiff. Originally suit was filed against defendants 1 and 2. LATER defendants 3 to 6 were brought record as party to the proceedings as per the order dated 19.11.1980, made in Application No.5280 of 1990. The suit was presented in this Court on 9.2.1987 and admitted 10.2.1987. Thesuit was filed by the petitioner stating that the plaintiff is a registered partnership firm represented by its Managing partner Mrs.Mohanasundari Murugan.

(3.) DEFENDANTS 3 to 5 who were later impleaded as parties/defendants to the suit have filed written statement on 7th September, 1990. According to the defendants the suit as framed is wholly misconceived and not maintainable either in law or on facts and circumstances the case. It is purely an abuse of process of law. In paragraph No.2 of the written statement, defendants 3 to 5 have stated thus: "These defendants state that the suit as framed is wholly misconceived and not maintainable either in law or on the facts and circumstances of the case. It is purely an abuse of process of law."