P.THAVASIMUTHU Vs. A.THANGARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants are the appellants. The respondents herein filed a suit for bare injunction. The suit was decreed by the trial Court and the findings of the trial Court were affirmed by the first appellate Court. Aggrieved by the concurrent findings, the defendants have come by way of this Second Appeal.

(2.) According to the respondents / plaintiffs, the suit property originally belonged to their forefathers viz., Rathinaswamy Dhas, Elayaperumal and Sivaraman, who are the sons of Pandaram. The plaintiffs have been in possession and enjoyment of the suit property exclusively as descendants of the original owners. It was claimed by the plaintiffs that they had put up a building in the suit property and planted trees and hence, they have been in settled possession of the suit property. It was further claimed that the defendants were strangers to the property and they had no right and possession over the same and without having any manner of right, the defendants attempted to interfere with the possession of the plaintiffs. Hence, the above suit was laid for bare injunction.

(3.) The appellants/defendants filed a written statement claiming right and possession over the suit property. It was specifically claimed by the defendants that the suit property had been treated as 'Nilaviyal Pathai' and used by the Mela Asaripallam Hindu Nadar Samudhaya People. It was also claimed that no individual could claim any right over the public property and hence, sought for dismissal of the suit. It was also asserted that the suit property had been in enjoyment of the entire villagers and the same was not in exclusive possession of the plaintiffs.