B. GUNA Vs. A. K. DHANANJEYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant in a suit for declaration, possession and mandatory injunction, succeeded before the Trial Court and suffered reversal findings before the First Appellate Court. The Legal Representatives of the defendant are the appellants herein.

(2.) The parties are described as per their litigative status before the Trial Court.

(3.) The case of the plaintiffs is that the western portion of the schedule 'A' property is the ancestral property of the plaintiffs and eastern portion of the schedule 'A' property is the self acquired property of the father of the plaintiffs. According to the plaintiffs, the father sold a portion of the suit property measuring 18 feet East West, 85 feet North South, in all 1530 sq.ft and also another portion 20 feet East West and 54 1/2 feet North South, in all 1090 sq.ft, in favour of the defendant, for valid sale consideration and retained schedule 'D' property. However, it is stated that in the sale deed, there was a mistake while describing the boundaries. According to the plaintiffs, they are retaining the suit property for over the statutory period and are in open continuous and uninterpreted possession to the knowledge of the defendant, insofar as B, C and D properties. As the defendant tried to interfere with the plaintiffs' property and also claimed to have orally purchased the 'B' schedule property. The plaintiffs were constrained to file the suit.