SURESH KUMAR Vs. SUSMITHA DEVARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant. He filed a suit for declaration of title and injunction against the respondent. The suit as well as the first Appeal preferred by him were dismissed. Hence, challenging the concurrent findings of the trial Court, he is before this Court.

(2.) The appellant and the respondent are husband and wife. According to the appellant/plaintiff, he is employed in United States and the suit property was purchased in the name of the appellant and the respondent by his father-in-law out of the funds sent by him to his father-in-law's account. It was specifically averred by the appellant that though sale deed in respect of the suit property jointly stands in the name of the appellant and the respondent, it was purchased only for the benefit of the appellant. Therefore, the appellant sought for declaration that he was the absolute owner of the suit property and for consequential injunction restraining the respondent from interfering with his alleged peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property.

(3.) The respondent herein filed a written statement and denied the averment of the appellant as if the suit property was purchased out of the funds sent by the appellant from abroad. It was further claimed by the respondent that the suit property was purchased by her father out of his funds for the benefit of the respondent. Therefore, she sought for dismissal of the suit.