JOHN VICTOR Vs. PATTUKOTTAI ARULMIGU VISWANATHASWAMY TEMPLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit property in respect of which a decree for injunction is prayed for belongs to the respondent-Devasthanam. The site which is the subject matter belongs to the Devasthanam. The superstructure had been purchased by the second respondent herein, who has been residing there from 1. 7. 1993. The second respondent has also been paying the rent for the land to the first respondent who is the plaintiff. As per the conditions of lease, no permanent superstructure can be put up and therefore, neither the second respondent nor his transferees can do so. Since the appellant asserted certain rights claiming from the second respondent and attempted to put up a permanent superstructure without obtaining permission from the first respondent, the suit was filed.

(2.) THE second respondent/first defendant remained ex parte.

(3.) THE appellant while admitting that the site belongs to the first respondent claimed that there can be no condition against putting up a permanent superstructure. According to the appellant, no new superstructure is being put up and only what is existing is being restored and for this, due permission has also been obtained from the Municipality. The first respondent by receiving the rent from the appellant had also acknowledged the right, title and interest of the appellant in the suit property. The Trial Court declined to grant injunction. The Appellate Court interfered and gave injunction and therefore, the second appeal has been filed.