SANTHAKUMARI Vs. LAKSHMIAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants in all the suits, preferred the above Letters Patent Appeals, having aggrieved by the judgments and decrees of the trial court and the learned Judge.

(2.) The respondents/plaintiffs in O.S.Nos.4918 to 4920 of 1976, on the file of the City Civil court, Madras filed the suit for return of purchase money paid pursuant to the sale deed executed by the appellants in favour of the plaintiffs on the ground that the defendants obtained the said money on misrepresentation made by the defendants as if they got a clear title for the same.

(3.) The properties in question in all the suits were leased out in favour of the plaintiffs' ancestors and the properties leased out were vacant sites, the plaintiffs and their predecessors have put up superstructure over the properties and they have been enjoying the properties by paying meagre rent. The 2nd defendant is the son of Jayarao. So the plaintiffs entered into an agreement with the defendants to purchase the properties for the consideration mentioned therein. Thereafter, the sale deeds were executed under Ex.A1, A4 and A7, dated 5.4.1972, 5.4.1972 and 14.12.1973. Subsequently, in 1976, the plaintiffs have come forward with the above suits seeking a prayer for direction directing the defendants to pay to the plaintiffs the amount paid as sale consideration for the purpose of purchasing the property under Ex.A1, A4 and A7. It is stated in the plaint that they have purchased the property on the basis of misrepresentation made by the defendants as if they are the owners of the properties. But the plaintiffs came to know that the temple records show that the said properties belong to Arulmigu Madhava Perumal temple. With the above said pleadings, the plaintiffs have come forward with the suits to recover the purchase money paid.