A.S. VEDHAGIRI Vs. GOVINDAMMAL AND VALLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in the original suit filed before the trial Court is the appellant in the second appeal. He has filed the suit for a declaration that the settlement deed dated 11.06.2009 executed by the first respondent/first defendant in favour of the second respondent/second defendant and registered as Document No.2587 of 2009 is void, not valid in law and not binding upon the appellant/plaintiff and for a permanent injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint 'B' schedule property. The learned trial Judge, namely the II Assistant Judge of the City Civil Court, Chennai decreed the suit as prayed for with cost by the judgment and decree of the trial Court dated 09.07.2010.

(2.) The decree passed by the trial Court was challenged by the respondents herein before the lower appellate Court, namely IV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai in A.S.No.359 of 2010. The appellant herein/plaintiff filed a miscellaneous petition in C.M.P.No.1150 of 2011 in the said appeal suit for reception and marking of additional documents as additional evidence. Similarly, the respondents herein/defendants filed two other petitions, namely C.M.P.No.1151 of 2011 and C.M.P.No.2140 of 2011 in the above said appeal suit for reception of additional documents as additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 C.P.C. The learned lower appellate Judge, after hearing the said civil miscellaneous petitions along with the appeal, dismissed all the three petitions. However, on merits, the appeal was allowed, the decree passed by the trial Court was set aside and the original suit filed by the appellant herein/plaintiff was dismissed by the common order and judgment dated 15.11.2011. The decree drawn on the basis of the said judgment of the lower appellate Court dated 15.11.2011 made in A.S.No.359 of 2010 is challenged in the present second appeal.

(3.) The averments made in the plaint, in brief, are as follows:-