KANDASAMY Vs. RANGASAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants in a suit for declaration and consequential permanent injunction, whose defence plea though accepted by the trial court, on rejection of the same by the first appellate Court are the appellants before this Court.

(2.) The following short facts are noticed in the pleadings of the parties: The plaintiffs are the owners of the sites bearing site Nos.27, 28, 41, 6 and 47 in Thayammal Layout in S.F.No.240/A1 in Kurichi Revenue Village in Podanur, Coimbatore Taluk. They have purchased the same under different sale deeds. The said sites were purchased by the plaintiffs for the purpose of putting up residential houses. A layout was formed and was duly approved. The present suit was filed with regard to the reserved sites shown in the plan produced as document No.1. After the purchase of the property, the plaintiffs and the other owners of various sites have put up construction and they are residing therein. At request of the plaintiffs and the other residents in the said layout, the local panchayat has put up flush out latrine in the portion of the reserved site. The defendants are the father and son and they have no right to the reserved sites. They were making a false claim to the suit properties and the defendants were also making an attempt to enclose the same by putting up an artificial fence. They also prevented the plaintiffs and the others from using the toilet constructed by the local panchayat, and hence, there arose a necessity to file the suit.

(3.) The defendants resisted the suit by stating that the plaintiff, who were unsuccessful in their attempt in purchasing the suit properties, have come forward with this suit in their individual capacity and they cannot ask for prayer in the absence of residents in Thayammal Layout and in the absence of the requirement under Order 1 Rule 8 of CPC; that Kurichi Town Panchayat, which has constructed latrine in a portion of the suit property and the Town Pl anning Authorities are the proper and necessary parties to this suit and the suit is bad for non joinder of the said parties; that the plaintiffs have no manner of right or interest in the suit property, and hence, the suit was to be dismissed.