V VAITHINATHA GOWNDAR Vs. KASTHURIBAI AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff who lost his case before both the Courts below in a suit for declaration and permanent injunction has broughtforth the Second Appeal.

(2.) The plaintiff sought the said relief stating that one Alavandar Gounder and his wife Kunjammal owned 1 acre 25 cents punja lands, out of which on 7.4.1975 they sold 14 cents in 198/18, 28 cents in 194/6, totalling 42 cents to the first defendant; that on 20.5.1975 they sold the rest of the lands to one Sulochana; that the said Solachana executed a Sale Deed in respect of all the three items of the properties wherein 12 cents which is in dispute was shown as first item. Pursuant to the said Sale deed, the plaintiff was put in possession and has been in enjoyment of the same all along; that taking advantage of the mistake that crept in the Sale Deed executed by Alavandar in favour of the said Sulachana and taking advantage of the Sale Deed executed in his favour under Ex.A10 dated 7.6.84, the defendant was attempting to interfere with the possession of the plaintiff. Hence, the plaintiff has filed the suit for declaration and permanent injunction.

(3.) The suit was resisted by the defendant stating that the subject matter of the instant suit i.e., 12 cents situate in S.No.194/17 was conveyed by the said Alavandar in favour of the defendant under Ex.A10 on 7.6.84; that the defendant was put in possession and he has been in enjoyment of the same and the contention of the plaintiff that there was a mistake in the description of the property in the Sale Deed executed in favour of Sulochana was not correct; that actually Sulachana could not make conveyance of the said 12 cents in S.No.194/17 in favour of the plaintiff under Ex.A3 Sale deed, since no such property was available at the time of the said sale and hence, it was a false claim and it has got to be rejected.