KOVI MANISEKARAN AND ORS. Vs. S. PERIANNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendants 1 to 3 in the original suit are the appellants in the second appeal. The plaintiff in the original suit is the respondent in the second appeal. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to in accordance with their rankings in the suit.

(2.) THE plaintiff -S.Periannan filed the suit, O.S. No. 845 of 2000 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Salem for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from causing disturbance to his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit properties. The third defendant is the wife of the plaintiff. The second defendant is the daughter of the plaintiff. The first defendant is the husband of the second defendant, hence, he is the son -in -law of the plaintiff. The said prayer was made on the basis of his contention that the suit properties were his self -acquired properties, in which none of the defendants did have any interest or title. But due to the fact that the third defendant, who is none other than the wife of the plaintiff, is living separately, all the three defendants joined together and made attempts to trespass into the suit properties and take forcible possession from the plaintiff.

(3.) AFTER framing necessary issues, a trial was conducted, in which the plaintiff figured as the sole witness (P.W.1) and produced four documents as Exhibits A -1 to A -4 on his side. On the side of the defendants including the third defendant, who figured as D.W.1, three witnesses were examined, but no document was produced. The learned trial Judge, at the conclusion of trial, accepted the defence case of the defendants and dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff, by a judgment and decree dated 25.3.2003.