ERAKKAMMAL Vs. SAMUGAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellants/Plaintiffs have projected the present Second Appeal as against the Judgment and Decree dated 31.03.1998 in A.S.No.105 of 1996 passed by the Learned Principal District Judge, Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri in affirming the Judgment and Decree dated 12.09.1996 in O.S.No.164 of 1996 passed by the Learned Subordinate Judge, Hosur.

(2.) THE First Appellate Court viz., the Learned Principal District Judge, Dharmapuri, while passing the Judgment in A.S.No.105 of 1996 (filed by the Appellants/Plaintiffs), has inter alia opined that PW1 (2nd Plaintiff) in his evidence has admitted that he knows about the filing of the suit in O.S.No.222 of 1980 after filing of the said case and no value can be given to the case of the Plaintiff that they do not know about the fifteen years case against the 1st Defendant and a natural question that arises is that as to why no action has been taken and further, after the 2nd Defendant obtaining possession of the property through Court, another question that crops up is that as to why the Plaintiffs in that suit have not taken legal action and further held that after purchase made by the 2nd Defendant for 19 years, no action has been taken and later during the year 1996, the suit has been filed in which there is no bona fide intention or justifiable reason and accordingly, the dismissal of the suit made by the trial Court is correct and consequently, dismissed the Appeal with costs, thereby, affirming the Judgment and Decree passed by the trial Court in the main suit.

(3.) AT the time of admission of the Second Appeal, this Court has formulated the following substantial questions of law for determination.