LAWS(MAD)-2022-2-227

P. CHINNADURAI Vs. T. SUBBUTHAI

Decided On February 24, 2022
P. CHINNADURAI Appellant
V/S
T. Subbuthai Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is the appellant herein.

(2.) The plaintiff filed O.S.No.87 of 2012 before the District Munsif Court, Srivaikundam, for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties. The suit was decreed by the trial Court. The defendant filed A.S.No.236 of 2017 before the Sub Court, Thiruchendur. The learned Subordinate Judge was pleased to allow the appeal and dismiss the suit. As against the same, the plaintiff has filed the above Second Appeal.

(3.) The plaintiff has contended that the suit schedule properties originally belonged to his father Pitchandi and he died intestate. After his death, the property devolved upon the plaintiff and his sister Deivakani. His sister Deivakani was married off with jewels and other materials and hence she has given up her right in the suit schedule properties. Hence, the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit schedule properties. According to the plaintiff, the defendant's property is located on the Western side. The plaintiff had applied for building plan permission under Exhibit A3 on 2/6/2000 for the construction of a compound wall on the Northern side of his property and he had completed the said construction. According to the plaintiff, the houses of both the plaintiff and the defendant are facing Northwards. The plaintiff has further contended that the husband of the defendant had disturbed the possession of the plaintiff in the year 2007. Hence, the plaintiff issued a legal notice under Exhibit A6 on 9/5/2008. For the said legal notice, the defendant's husband sent a reply notice on 26/5/2008 under Exhibit A7. As per the said reply notice, the defendant has alleged that the plaintiff has encroached upon 2 feet into the property of the defendant and has put up a compound wall. Thereafter on 10/6/2012, when the defendant attempted to interfere with the possession of the property, the plaintiff is constrained to file the present suit.