(1.) This appeal is directed against the Judgment in A. S. No. 85 of 1989 on the file of the Subordinate Court at Srivilliputhur, which Judgment confirmed the Order made by the District Munsif in E. A. 93 of 1986 in E. P. No. 102/1985 in O. S. No. 725/1981 on the file of the District Munsif's Court at Srivilliputhur. The order of the trial Court is dated 19-1-1988 and that of the appellate Court is dated 27-8-1993.
(2.) The appellants herein were the claimants who filed an application under 0.21 Rule 58 Civil Procedure Code claiming title to the properties which were sought to be attached and brought to sale by the first respondent Decree holder, who had obtained a decree against the second respondent in O. S. No. 728/81. The decree to be obtained was on a promissory note which had been executed by the father of the petitioners who is the second respondent in this appeal and which pro note has been attested by the grand father of the petitioner one Perumalsamy Naicker.
(3.) In the execution petition filed by the Decree holder in E. P. No. 102/1985, since the properties were sought to be attached and brought to sale on the ground that they were the properties of the Judgment debtor, the appellants herein make an application claiming that the Judgment debtor was not the owner of the properties but that it is the petitioners who were owners. They traced their title in respect of items 1, 4 and 5 of the schedule to the Execution petition to a gift deed executed by their grand father Perumalsamy Naicker in which their father Panneerselvam had also joined, that gift deed dated 5-6-1981 has been marked as Ex. A. 1. Perumalsamy Naicker himself had traced his title to the suit properties to a settlement deed executed by his mother on 2-5-1964. The fact that the mother of Perumalsamy Naicker one Lakshmiammal was the exclusive owner of the properties so settled on her son, is not in dispute. The claimants claim their title on the basis of the settlement deed executed by their grand-mother.