KUMARASAMY Vs. RAMU AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff in suit O.S.No.22 of 2001 is the appellant herein and the defendants in the suit are the respondents.

(2.) THE plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction against the defendants/respondents restraining them from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit properties.

(3.) THE suit was resisted by the defendant on the ground that in the first item of property situated in R.S.No.116/7, out of 18 cents, the first defendant had purchased 11.5 cents from one Kalyanasundaram and others and in the 'B' schedule property situated in R.S.No.116/8, there are tamarind trees which have been in possession of the second and third defendants' predecessors for morethan 50 years and it was said to have given to them as the grant by the villagers and the defendants claim possession of the 'B' schedule property and rights over the tamarind trees. Therefore, the father of the plaintiff's vendor Kaliyaperumal never had any right and the same is not valid. Therefore, the defendants prayed for dismissal of the suit.