K PERUMAL Vs. M MURUGESAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE unsuccessful defendants in O.S.No.697 of 1994 on the file of the Second Additional District Munsif Court, Salem are the appellants in the above second appeal.

(2.) FOR the sake of convenience the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the suit.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Courts below have not properly considered the first defendant's title deed-Ex.B-1 wherein it is clearly stated that the property on the northern side of the property of the plaintiff is patta land belonging to the first defendant. THE learned counsel further submitted that the evidence of D.W.2-the Assistant Engineer from Salem Corporation clearly establishes that the suit property lying on the northern side of the plaintiff's house was never dedicated or made over to the Municipal Corporation as a road. THE learned counsel further submitted that the Commissioner's report and plan has been misconstrued by the Courts below. THE learned counsel further submitted that the Courts below have misread the evidence of D.W.1 and have observed as if the first defendant had admitted that the suit property has been used as the public pathway for more than 50 years.