GANAPATHY Vs. RAJESH; V V RAMACHANDRAN; SERMACHELVI; PONNUCHAMY; RAMAKRISHNAN; NARAYANAN; RUKMANI; PADMAVATHI; CHIDAMBARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant herein, who is the unsuccessful second defendant in the suit in O.S.No.338 of 2004, has come up with the present Second Appeal, challenging the judgment and decree dated 05.04.2010, made in A.S.No.7 of 2010 on the file of learned Subordinate Judge, Kovilpatti, which was confirmed by the learned District Munsif, Kovilpatti, by judgment and decree dated 30.06.2009, made in O.S.No.338 of 2004.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to in this judgment in accordance with their respective ranks in the suit. At appropriate places, the ranks of the parties in the appeal are also shown to achieve clarity.

(3.) The case of the plaintiffs in the suit in O.S.No.338 of 2004 is that by way of registered sale deed, the first plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the first schedule properties, the second plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the second schedule properties, the third plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the third schedule properties, the fourth plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the fourth schedule properties and the fifth plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the fifth and sixth schedule properties. The defendants have no right over the suit schedule properties. The possession of the plaintiffs is confirmed by way of decree in O.S.No.344 of 1943. The possession of the plaintiffs' predecessors-in-interest over the suit properties is also confirmed in A.S.No.243 of 1944, arising out of O.S.No.344 of 1943. Such being the position, the defendants interfered with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiffs contending that the suit properties originally belonged to their father Ponnaiah @ Poolar. Therefore, they prayed for a decree of permanent injunction.