ATHI PURANAM PILLAI Vs. K VEERASWAMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant/plaintiff (during his lifetime) has focused the present Second Appeal as against the judgment and decree dated 31.3.1999 in A.S. No. 148 of 1998 passed by the Learned Additional Sub Judge, Nagapattinam, in reversing the judgment and decree dated 4.3.1998 in O.S.No. 207 of 1994 passed by the Learned District Munsif, Mannargudi. During the pendency of the Second Appeal, the appellant/plaintiff died on 9.11.2001 and later, the 2nd and 3rd appellants have been brought on record as Legal Representatives of the deceased sole appellant/plaintiff, as per order dated 2.9.2004 passed in C.M.P. No. 14110 of 2004.

(2.) The First Appellate Court viz., the Learned Additional Sub Judge, Nagapattinam, while passing the judgment in A.S.No. 148 of 1998 on 31.3.1999 (in the Appeal filed by the respondent/appellant), has among other things observed that 'though the respondent (plaintiff/1st appellant since deceased) is a tenant of the suit property, the appellant (respondent/defendant) is not a Sub-tenant under him for the suit property and that the respondent (plaintiff- later deceased) should file the suit for recovery of possession of the suit property treating the appellant (respondent/defendant) as trespasser. But, the suit for recovery of possession is on the basis of tenancy. Such, a suit cannot be said as maintainable etc., and allowed the Appeal without costs, thereby, setting aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court passed in O.S. No. 207 of 1994 dated 4.3.1998 and consequently, dismissed the suit filed by the 1st appellant/plaintiff (later died).

(3.) Before the trial Court, in the main suit, 1 to 4 Issues have been framed for adjudication. On behalf of the plaintiff, Witnesses P.W.1 and P.W.2 have been examined and Exhibit A-1 to Exhibit A-4 have been marked. On the side of the respondent/defendant, Witnesses D.W. 1 to D.W.3 have been examined and Exhibit B-1 to Exhibit B-4 have been marked.