AZHINJILAN Vs. VISALAKSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff in the original suit is the appellant in the second appeal. He filed the suit O.S.No.528 of 2004 on the file of the Court of Principal District Munsif, Tindivanam for the relief of declaration and injunction. The learned trial Judge, after trial, decreed the suit granting the relief of declaration and permanent injunction without costs by a judgment and decree dated 09.01.2007. On an appeal preferred by the respondent herein/defendant in A.S.No.19 of 2007 on the file of Additional Subordinate Judge, Tindivanam, the learned lower appellate Judge allowed the appeal, reversed the judgment of the trial Court, set aside the decree passed by the trial Court and dismissed the original suit without costs. As against the said decree of the lower appellate Court the present second appeal has been filed.

(2.) THE appellant herein/plaintiff had filed the suit based on the following averments: The suit property more fully described in the plaint schedule belonged to the ancestors of the appellant/plaintiff by virtue of their possessory title and in the hands of Mannangatti, the father of the appellant/plaintiff, as his ancestral property. The said Mannangatti died about 20 years back leaving behind him the appellant/plaintiff as his sole legal heir. The appellant/plaintiff continued to possess the property without any interruption for more than 12 years. He had also perfected title by adverse possession. The appellant/plaintiff had dug a Well and also obtained loan from the Agricultural cooperative societies on several occasions. The respondent/defendant was not in possession and enjoyment of the suit property at any point of time. Due to the instigation of the bad elements, the respondent/defendant using her influence got patta for the suit property transferred in her name and she started making attempts to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the appellant/plaintiff in respect of the suit property making a claim of title to the same. Hence, the appellant/plaintiff was constrained to file the suit for the reliefs of declaration and permanent injunction.

(3.) THE learned trial Judge framed three issues which are as follows: 1)Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of declaration in respect of the suit property as prayed for? 2)Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of permanent injunction as prayed for? 3)To what other relief?