R SUGUMARAN Vs. S PADMANABHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and decree in A.S.No.331of 1995 on the file of the Court of Principal District Judge, Nagapattinam. The plaintiff, who has won the case before the trial Court, and lost his case in the first appellate Court, is the appellant in the second appeal.

(2.) THE averments in the plaint for the purpose of deciding this appeal are as follows: THE plaintiff has filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. THE plaintiff has purchased the plaint schedule property as per the sale deeds dated 26.8.1992 and 22.12.1993. While mentioning the boundaries on four sides, a mistake has been crept in. To rectify the same, a rectification deed has been executed on 21.12.1993, even from the date of execution of those sale deeds, the plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the suit properties. THE plaintiff has put up fence around the suit property in Plot No.11 at A.T.P. Nagar. THE plaintiff's wife is the owner of the shop building near the plaint schedule property. She has also constructed a terraced house near the said shop building. Only to provide access to the said house, the plaintiff has purchased the plaint schedule property in S.No.86/1B. THE defendant has no title or interest in respect of S.No.86/1B or in plot No.11, A.T.P.Nagar. THE defendant is looking after the lands in S.No.86/1A under the agreement entered into between him with the owner of the said S.No.86/1A. THE said land is situated on the western side of the plaint schedule property. With a view to create a passage to S.No.86/1A, the defendant on 23.11.1994 began to cut and remove the fence put up by the plaintiff around the suit property. THE said attempt of the defendant was prevented by the timely intervention of the plaintiff. At any time, the defendant may trespass into the suit property and commit damage to the plaintiff's suit property. Hence, the plaintiff has come forward with the suit for permanent injunction.

(3.) ON the above pleadings, the trial Court had framed five issues for trial. ON the side of the plaintiff, P.W1 was examined and Exs P1 to P5 were marked. ON the side of the defendant D.W.1 was examined and Exs B1 to B12 were marked.