(1.) These Second Appeals have been filed challenging the judgment and decree of the Fast Track Court, Dindigul dtd. 29/4/2011 passed in A.S.Nos.38 and 39 of 2010.
(2.) Two suits were filed, namely, O.S.No.133 of 2006 and O.S.No.299 of 2006. O.S.No.133 of 2006 was filed by the respondent before the Principal Sub Court, Dindigul seeking for declaration and permanent injunction and in the alternative for partition against the appellant and her father Perumal Ambalam and her husband Mookan Ambalam in respect of suit A schedule property. O.S.No.299 of 2006 was originally filed by the appellant (Nallammal) against the respondent before the II Additional District Munsif Court, Dindigul seeking for a bare injunction restraining the respondent from interfering with the appellant's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. Thereafter, the suit O.S.No.299 of 2006, which was originally filed before the II Additional District Munsif Court, Dindigul, was transferred to the file of the Principal Sub Court, Dindigul and re-numbered as O.S.No.149 of 2009.
(3.) Since the subject matter of the suit schedule properties in O.S.No.133 of 2006 filed by the respondent and O.S.No.149 of 2009 filed by the appellant were one and the same, both the suits were tried together. As seen from the pleadings, the case of the appellant is that the entire suit schedule properties, which are the subject matter of O.S.No.133 of 2006 and O.S.No.149 of 2009 measuring 3 acres and 6 cents, absolutely belongs to her. She claims that she became the absolute owner by virtue of a registered settlement deed dtd. 19/4/2002 (Ex.B1) executed by her father Perumal Ambalam. According to the appellant, the respondent attempted to dispossess the appellant unlawfully from the suit schedule properties which necessitated her to file the suit O.S.No. 149 of 2009 seeking for permanent injunction restraining the respondent from interfering with her peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties.