TAMIL NADU BRICK INDUSTRIES Vs. STATE REP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 9.4.2001 in A.S.No.37 of 1995 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Poonamallee confirming the judgment and decree dated 30.8.1994 in O.S.No.582 of 1983 on the file of the District Munsif, Poonamallee.

(2.) The unsuccessful plaintiff, who lost the suit both in the trial Court and in the first appellate Court, is the appellant herein. The suit was filed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their men from removing the fencing put up by the plaintiff around the suit property including the portion marked as ABCD in the plaint plan. According to the plaintiff, it has purchased the lands measuring 35.55 acres in Nolambur village, Saidapet taluk and there is a water channel from Nolambur lake and the said channel is running in the middle of the lands purchased by the plaintiff. According to the plaintiff, the plaintiff and its predecessors-in-title have been enjoying the channel for the past several decades. According to the plaintiff, the plaintiff has put up fence around its lands including the channel and the plaintiff has been in possession and enjoyment of the channel along with the lands and the Government also issued B-Memos showing that the plaintiff has been enjoying the channel. The suit has been filed on the ground that the defendants have attempted to interfere with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the channel. The plaintiff has also referred to an earlier suit in O.S.No.1118 of 1982 on the file of the District Munsif, Poonamallee and it is stated that there was a compromise and on the basis of the compromise, the suit was dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to file a fresh suit. According to the plaintiff, the defendants have been taking steps to remove the fencing put up by the plaintiff around the channel portion and therefore the suit has been filed for permanent injunction.

(3.) The defendants, viz., the Government of Tamil Nadu denied all the allegations. In the written statement, it is stated that the channel is situate in Survey Nos.143/2,146/3, 147/2, 147/3 and 148 and the channel passes through the patta lands belonging to the plaintiff. According to the defendants, the channel is meant for all persons. It is stated by the defendants that the plaintiff has encroached upon the channel poramboke by putting fence around the same and the plaintiff has been removing earth therefrom. It is stated that the fence was removed on 28.7.1982 to allow the usage by others. It is also stated that the plaintiff was served notices for eviction of encroachment and the defendants have got every right to evict the plaintiff from the poramboke land of the defendant.