PHILOMINAL Vs. M. SHANMUGASUNDARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Defendants in the Original Suit are the Appellants in the Second Appeal. The deceased First Respondent -Shanmugasundaram filed O.S.No.93 of 2007 on the file of the District Munsif, Thiruvaiyaru for recovery of possession of the Suit properties from the Appellants (Defendants in the original Suit). The said prayer was made based on the following Plaint averments:

(2.) THE Suit was resisted by the Appellants/Defendants based on the averments made in their Written Statement which are, in brief, as follows:

(3.) IN the trial, the Plaintiff figured as the sole witness (PW1) and produced 9 documents as Exs.A1 to A9 on his side whereas the First Appellant/First Defendant figured as the sole witness (DW1) and 5 documents were marked as Exs.B1 to B5 on the side of the Appellant herein/Defendants. The learned trial Judge, on a consideration of evidence, held that the Suit was not barred by res judicata. The learned trial Judge held that the Plaintiff 's contention that the Defendants were trespassers could not be sustained and, on the basis of the said finding, negatived the prayer for recovery of possession. The Trial Court also held that the Plaintiff was not entitled to any relief and accordingly dismissed the Suit by its Judgment and Decree dated 27.06.2008 without costs.