PONNAIYAN Vs. MUNIAN DIED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant who lost before the lower appellate court is the appellant herein.

(2.) THE respondent herein/ plaintiff filed a suit in O. S. No. 159 of 1978 on the file of the District Munsif of Kallakurichi against the appellant/defendant herein, praying for a declaration and injunction. Briefly it is the case of the plaintiff that the suit properties are the ancestral properties of the plaintiff and that he and his father have been in possession of the properties for the past 30 years. THE plaintiff also claimed that he has acquired prescriptive title to the suit properties. According to the plaintiff the defendant has no right for possession of the suit properties and that as the defendant attempted to trespass into the suit properties from 5. 7. 1978, he filed the present suit.

(3.) NOW, I proceed to consider the case of the plaintiff viz. , the pleadings as well as the oral and documentary evidence let in to substantiate the claim of the plaintiff that he has acquired title by adverse possession to the suit properties. At the outset, it may be pointed out as already mentioned the total extent of the suit property comprised in four different survey numbers is 4 acres, 46 cents. The defendant does not dispute the claim of the plaintiff to an extent of 2 acres, 2 cents. Hence, the subject matter of dispute or the area of controversy is only with regard to an extent of 2. 44 acres which according to the defendant, his father purchase the same from the plaintiff's father on 24. 2. 1946 under a registered sale deed marked as Ex. B-3 before actually taking up the pleadings and the evidence on record adduced by the plaintiff for consideration whether he has perfected his title by adverse possession certain legal aspects and decisions have to be borne in mind.