OVARI SRI SUYAMBULINGA SWAMI TEMPLE Vs. PALANI SHANMUGAVEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The second defendant is the appellant herein.

(2.) The plaintiff filed O.S. No. 216 of 1989 before the District Munsif Court, Srivaikuntam for the relief of permanent injunction that his possession as a lessee should not be disturbed by the defendants. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court. The plaintiff filed A.S. No. 39 of 1995 before the Sub Court, Tuticorin. The learned Subordinate Judge was pleased to allow the appeal and decree the suit. As against the same, the present Second Appeal has been filed by the second defendant.

(3.) The plaintiff had contended that the first defendant temple is the owner of the suit schedule properties and the second defendant is the present trustee of the first defendant temple. According to the plaintiff, he was granted an agricultural lease of the suit schedule properties by the defendant on 15/9/1983 under Exhibit A1. The plaintiff has been paying the lease amount to the defendant under Exhibits A2 and A3 on 26/8/1984 and 5/3/1986. Since some third parties started disturbing the possession of the plaintiff, the plaintiff had filed O.S. No. 465 of 1984 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Srivaikuntam and the suit was decreed in favour the plaintiff on 16/2/1989 and the decree is marked as Exhibit A4. When the suit was pending, the first defendant has issued a notice on 25/7/1988 under Exhibit A5, calling upon the plaintiff to vacate and hand over the possession. The plaintiff has sent the lease amount through money order to the defendant under Exhibit A6 on 10/3/1989. However, the same was returned as refused under Exhibit A7. Since the defendant is attempting to dispossess him, the present suit has been filed for permanent injunction not to disturb the possession of the plaintiff as a lessee of the defendant.