R KUMARASAMY KOUNDER Vs. V EZHUMALAI KOUNDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. This second appeal is filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No.54 of 1991, on the file of Additional District Munsiffs Court, Villupuram.

(2.) THE suit filed by the appellant is one for declaration of title and recovery of possession on the following facts:- THE property having an area of 80 cents originally belonged to one Govindasamy Gounder who sold the same to one Pandurangan as per Ex.B.1. Pandurangan had two sons. It is said that on the death of the wife of Pandurangan, these children, who were then minors, were left in the custody of their uncle Natesan. At that time, Pandurangan executed the original of Ex.A.4 settlement deed dated 15.12.1986. THE original of the document is marked as Ex.B.15 on the side of the defendant. It is averred that as per the settlement deed, the minors became the absolute owners of the property who were then under the protection of their uncle Natesan. Pandurangan was a permanent employee at Madras. On 21.6.1989, Pandurangan executed a cancellation of the settlement as evidenced by Ex. B.3 and thereafter he sold 3 cents of land under Ex.B.2 and a lease for a period of ten years as per Ex. B.4 in favour of the defendant. On the minor sons, the elder one became major and executed a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff as per Ex.A.1. It is averred that the defendant trespassed into the property on the basis of the sale and lease deed executed by Pandurangan. THE suit is, therefore, filed on the basis of Ex.A.1, claiming title over the property and also for recovery of the same.

(3.) DURING trial, Ex.A.1 to A.6 were marked on the side of the plaintiff and P.Ws. 1 and 2 were examined. P.W.1 is the plaintiff and P.W.2 is an independent witness. On the side of the defendant, the defendant got himself examined as D.W.1 and the plaintiff's vendor and the elder son of Pandurangan was examined as D.W.2 and Pandurangan himself deposed as D.W.3.