VEERASAMY NAIDU Vs. PUSHPARANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 23. 02. 2004 passed by the District Munsif, Namakkal in I. A. No. 125 of 2004 in O. S. No. 614 of 1999, dismissing the Application filed under Sec. 151 C. P. C to reopen the case to examine the Revenue Official. Plaintiffs are the Revision Petitioners.

(2.) O. S. NO. 614 of 1999:- The Suit Property relates to S. No. 426/21-0. 127. 5 Hec. of Vadavathoor Village. The Plaintiffs filed the Suit alleging that the Suit Property in S. No. 426/21 a village Temple is situated and the Suit Property is being used for the gathering and for the celebration of festivals in the Temple. According to the Plaintiffs, the Suit Property is a poromboke land and no patta has been issued. Claiming herself to be entitled to the Suit Property, the Defendant was interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the Suit Property. Hence, the Plaintiff has filed the Suit for Permanent Injunction.

(3.) DENYING the Plaint averments, the Defendant has filed the Written Statement contending that she is in possession and enjoyment of the Suit Property for more than fifteen years. According to her, patta was also granted in her favour. The Defendant had already filed O. S. No. 79 of 1999 on the file of District Munsif, Namakkal. In the said Suit, in I. A. No. 118 of 1999, Injunction Application was filed and the Application was allowed granting temporary injunction, as against which the Plaintiffs have not preferred any appeal. When the Defendant was not in the Suit village, the Plaintiffs have attempted to cut and remove the trees and also attempted to remove the thatched shed. About few days prior to the institution of the Suit, the Plaintiffs keeping their things in the Suit Property and falsely claiming to be in possession of the Suit Property filed the Suit. Since the Plaintiffs are not in possession of the Suit Property, they are not entitled to the relief.