ELANGESWARAN Vs. SOWRIRAJAN; VAIRAMANI; ANBURAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the plaintiff in O.S.No.163 of 2010 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Chidambaram. The respondents herein are the defendants in the suit. The said suit was filed by the plaintiff seeking a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from in any manner interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The defendants took the plea that the plaintiff is not in possession of the property and as a matter of fact, the defendants are in possession of the property. The trial Court by decree and judgement dated 28.11.2012, decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff. As against the same, the defendants filed an appeal in A.S.No.9 of 2013 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Chidambaram. The First Appellate Court by decree and judgement dated 21.01.2014 allowed the appeal thereby reversing the decree and judgement of the trial Court. Aggrieved over the same, the appellant/plaintiff is before this Court with this second appeal.

(2.) According to the plaintiff, his grand father one Mr.Thangarasu was the owner of 0.16 cents of land comprised in S.No.59/23 at Odakanallur Village in Chidambaram District. Mr.Murugesan is the brother of Mr.Thangarasu. The first defendant is the son of Mr.Murugesan. The second defendant is the wife of the first defendant. The third defendant is the son of the first defendant.

(3.) According to the plaintiff, though Mr.Thangarasu was the absolute owner of the entire extent of 0.16 cents, there arose some dispute between him and his brother Mr.Murugesan. Mr.Murugesan filed a suit in O.S.No.855 of 1967 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Chidambaram in respect of the said property. During the pendency of the same, there was a compromise reached between Mr.Murugesan and Mr.Thangarasu, in which, a small northern portion out of the 0.16 cents in S.No.59/23 was allotted to Mr.Murugesan and the rest was retained by Mr.Thangarasu. After the demise of Mr.Thangarasu, there was a partition among the children of Mr.Thangarasu including the plaintiff. It is the further case of the plaintiff that in the said partition, 4 cents of land comprised in S.No.59/23 was allotted to him out of 16 cents of land. Thus, according to the plaintiff, he has been in possession and enjoyment of the said 4 cents of land which is the suit property herein.