NALLAPPA GOUNDER Vs. LAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There are two suits between the parties, one filed by the appellant as O.S. No. 13 of 1983 (formerly O.S. No. 1474 of 1981 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Namakkal) and the other filed by the respondent as O.S. No. 56 of 1982 in the Sub-Court, Namakkal. The plaintiff in one suit is the defendant in the other and vice versa. They are brother and sister. The plaintiff Nallappa Gounder in O. S. No. 13 1983 who is the defendant in O.S. No. 56 of 1982 has been unsuccessful in both the suits in the trial Court and has preferred both the present appeal suits against his sister Lakshmi. A.S. No. 495 of 1983 relates to O.S. No. 56 of 1982. The transferred A.S. No. 539 of 1989 relates to O.S. No. 13 of 1983. (We may refer to the plaintiff in O.S. No. 13 of 1983 and the defendant in O.S. No. 56 of 1982 as the appellant. The defendant in O.S. No. 13 of 1983 and the plaintiff in O.S. No. 56 of 1982 may be referred to as the respondent in the course of this judgement).

(2.) The appellant filed the suit O.S. No. 1474 of 1981 on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Namakkal, against the respondent, his sister, seeking the relief of permanent injunction restraining the respondent from interfering with his possession of the suit properties. He averred in the plaint that the suit properties belong to him absolutely and that he has been in possession and enjoyment of the suit properties accordingly by having the patta in his name and paying the kist in his own right for 14 years and that none else including the respondent has got right, interest or possession to the suit properties. He stated that he installed the electric motor and oil engine in Cauvery to irrigate his lands with the permission of the District Collector, Salem, and has improved the lands. He added that he is residing with his family in the house constructed by him in S. No. 174/15 and has been paying the house tax. Since the respondent threatened to interfere in the cultivation of the lands by the appellant, the suit for injunction is said to have been filed by the appellant. (This suit was transferred from the District Munsif's Court, Namakkal and numbered as O.S. No. 13 of 1983 later in the Sub-Court).

(3.) The respondent resisted the suit and denied. in her written statement that the suit properties belong to the appellant (defendant) absolutely and that he is in possession of those properties for 14 years. The respondent stated that all the suit properties are the joint family properties belonging to Ramana Gounder (the father of the appellant and the respondent) and the appellant and that some of the properties have been purchased in the name of Ramana Gounder and some in the name of the appellant. She, however, asserted that all the properties are the joint family properties of Ramana Gounder and the appellant. She stated that the improvement said to have been made by the appellant in respect of the suit lands is for the benefit of the joint family and that the house situate in S. No. 174/15 is also the joint family house. She further stated that on 13-10-1981, Ramana Gounder had sold away his half share in the suit properties for a proper consideration of Rs. 62,500/- in her favour and has given possession of the same to her. She contended that the claim of the appellant as if all the suit properties belong to him absolutely and the relief of injunction prayed for against the respondent is not sustainable. She added that the appellant should have asked for the relief of partition instead of bare injunction against her and that the suit should be dismissed.