KANDASAMY Vs. KOLANDASAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendants are the appellants. THE plaintiff filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their men from in any manner interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit properties viz. , cart track. THE plaintiff claimed that he and his forefathers have been enjoying the cart track of about 13 feet breadth leading from Mailapalayam Kamalapuram Panchayat Road and runs towards north and ends in the plaintiff's land. THE defendants also executed a muchalika in favour of the plaintiff confirming the right to use of the cart track by the plaintiff. Since the defendants with the help of some rowdy elements are threatening to interfere with the peaceful enjoyment of the cart track by the plaintiff, the suit has been filed for permanent injunction.

(2.) THE defendants in their written statement contended that the measurement given as 13 feet as a cart track is not correct; there is an alternate cart track for the plaintiff to reach his house; the alleged muchalika is false; the, description of suit property is not correct the suit is liable to be dismissed.

(3.) 0. 7, Rule 3, of the C. P. C. , reads as follows: "where the subject matter of the suit is immovable property, the plaint shall contain a description of the property sufficient to identify it, and, in case such property can be identified by boundaries or numbers in a record of settlement or survey, the plaint shall specify such boundaries or numbers. "