S.RAMAKRISHNAN Vs. M.RAMADAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The un-successful plaintiff has preferred the above appeal. The Second Appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and decree, dtd. 27/11/2017 passed in A.S.No.35 of 2013 on the file of the I Additional Subordinate Court, Nagercoil, confirming the judgment and decree, dtd. 28/2/2013 passed in O.S.No.441 of 2005 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Nagercoil.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per the litigative status before the trial Court.

(3.) According to the plaintiff, he had purchased the suit schedule property through a registered sale deed, dtd. 30/8/2001 in Ex-A1 from one Thangaraja son of Kandhasamy represented by his power holder, Antony. Pursuant to his purchase, revenue records were mutated in his name and he is in possession and enjoyment of the suit property. It is the further case of the plaintiff that the defendant, who is having no right over the suit property and who is having property adjacent to the suit schedule property of the plaintiff, had attempted several times to encroach into the suit property. The suit property is surrounded by well bounded boundaries in which, the plaintiff is in enjoyment. While so, on 15/7/2005, the defendant attempted to destroy the boundary line to encroach upon the plaintiff's property, which was thwarted by the plaintiff by his timely intervention. On the complaint given by the plaintiff, the Police had also enquired into and warned the defendant. However, in spite of the same, again on 16/7/2005, the defendant along with his men attempted to enter into the suit property. Hence, the plaintiff had come up with the suit for permanent prohibitory injunction.