STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs. MOHAMED NAGIB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr.Shiva Shanmugham, Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Even though notices have been served on the respondents on 3.12.2001, there is no representation on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) 2.1. The revision petitioner is the defendant in O.S. No.833 of 1978 laid by the respondents/ plaintiffs for a decree and judgment to declare that the compound wall is within the boundary of the plaintiffs" land in T.S. No.230/1 and consequently, restraining the defendant from demolishing the same by means of a permanent injunction. 2.2. The respondents/ plaintiffs filed the suit on a specific plea that they had purchased the suit building and vacant site in T.S. No.230/1 in Block No.3 of T.S.Ward No.3 of Palayamkottai Municipality and therefore, had prayed for the said declaration. 2.3. The suit was resisted by the revision petitioner/ defendant contending that even though the respondents/ plaintiffs had purchased the property located in T.S. No.230/1, they had raised a compound wall not in T.S. No.230/1, but in T.S. No.234, which lies west of T.S. No.230/1. 2.4. Upon the above rival contentions, the suit was originally decreed by the learned Principal District Munsif, Tirunelveli, on 30.9.1993 and on appeal in A.S. No.7 of 1994 before the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Tirunelveli, the decree and the judgment of the trial Court dated 30.9.1993 were set aside and the appeal was allowed by a decree and judgment dated 13.2.1996 by the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Tirunelveli, who had remitted the matter to the learned Principal District Munsif, Tirunelveli, with a direction to survey the suit property and render a decision on merits. 2.5. It is, at this stage, the respondents/ plaintiffs had chosen to amend the prayer in O.S. No.833 of 1978, contending that the boundaries prevail over the measurements and accordingly, prayed for amendment of the original prayer namely, to declare that the compound wall is within the boundary of the plaintiffs" land in T.S. No.230/1 and consequently, restraining the defendant from demolishing the same by means of a permanent injunction and prayed to strike down the words "in T.S. No.230/1" and in that place add "west of the compound wall and the fence of the Government Forest Bungalow" in I.A. No.814 of 2000. 2.6. The above amendment was objected by the revision petitioner contending that the respondents/ plaintiffs are attempting to project a new case and protract the proceedings. Accepting the case of the respondents/ plaintiffs, the Principal District Munsif, Tiruneveli, allowed the above I.A. No.814 of 2000, by an order dated 23.11.2000. Hence, the above revision.