RAJENDRAN; NAGAMUTHU; RAMU Vs. AMMACHA AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful defendants before the first appellate court are the appellants. The suit was filed by the plaintiff for declaration and recovery of possession.

(2.) The suit property belonged to one Chinnammal. The plaintiff is the daughter of the said Chinnammal and the defendants are the children of one of the sons of Chinnammal. According to the plaintiff, the suit property being an extent of 1.40 cents was settled 25 years ago by Chinnammal orally. From the date of the said settlement, she has been possession in the suit property. In fact, the settlor Chinnammal was also living in the same property till her death. After the death of the said Chinnammal, the plaintiff left the village and lived with her husband. The defendants who are the sons of the younger brother of the plaintiff, claim right in the suit property. As the plaintiff is a woman and an aged person, taking advantage of the same, the defendants had taken away all the documents from her in April 1994 and did not allow the plaintiff to enter into the suit property. Hence, the plaintiff lodged a Police complaint. As the defendants denied the title to the plaintiff and encroached upon the suit property, the suit came to be filed. The suit was contested by the defendants on various grounds.

(3.) The defendants denied the said settlement deed dated 14.06.1964 executed by the Chinnammal in favour of Govindaraj who is father of the defendants. The defendants specifically denied that they had not trespassed to the suit property. The defendants also disputed the subsequent oral settlement of the suit property in favour of the plaintiff. Except the suit property, the defendants are not in possession of any other property. The defendants further admitted that the suit property was never had been in their possession and enjoyment.