RAMAMOORTHI Vs. RAJENDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved defendants 3 to 5, 7 to 10, 12, 13 and 15 have filed this second appeal against the concurrent findings of the courts below in decreeing the suit for declaration and permanent injunction with costs in favour of the plaintiff.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff before the Trial Court is as under:-

(3.) The suit was resisted by the 3rd defendant by filing written statement, which was adopted by the defendants 1, 4, 5 and 7 to 12, contending that the suit is not maintainable as it is not properly valued and requisite court fee is not paid; and that the suit properties are house and house sites and are bounded by houses and house sites. It was further contended that the suit properties belonged to the first defendant Ammachi Ammal; and that when she offered to sell the same, this defendant and the 4th defendant purchased them under a registered sale deed dated 10.06.1997 for valid and adequate consideration; and that this defendant is a lorry driver and when he had gone on his job to Panruti, he purchased the stamps there itself; though Ammachi ammal and her daughters executed the sale deed on 10.06.1997, it was registered on 18.08.1997 as this defendant and 4th defendant were in short of amounts required for the registration fee and related expenses. It is further stated that the plaintiff, who is the grand son of the first defendant, exploited this situation and fabricated the sale deed as if it was executed on 25.06.1997 and the first defendant never intended to sell the properties to the plaintiff; the plaintiff took the first defendant to the Sub-Registrar's office and got the document registered by misrepresenting her that it was a document to revoke the Will executed by her; the first defendant, who was an illiterate lady in her old age of 82 years and sick, acted on the dictates of the plaintiff; the plaintiff is not entitled to the suit properties and he never took possession of the same. It is also averred that in pursuance of the sale deed dated 10.06.1997, this defendant along with 4th defendant took possession of the properties and was in enjoyment of the same in their own right and they have converted the suit properties into housing plots and sold major portion to various persons, including defendants 5 to 12, on different dates for valuable consideration and they are in peaceful enjoyment. Hence, they prayed for dismissal of the suit.