S RAMASUBBU Vs. N RAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the judgment and decree of the Sub Court, Sivakasi, made in A.S.No.25 of 2014 dated 18.04.2015, confirming the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.164 of 2012, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sivakasi dated 18.11.2013, this Second Appeal has been preferred. The defendant who lost before the Courts below is the appellant herein.

(2.) For the sake of convenience both the parties will be referred to they were before the trial court.

(3.) The plaintiffs/respondents herein state that they are the absolute owners of the suit property as per the sale deed Exhibits A1 to A4, they are in possession and enjoyment of the property from the date of purchase. It is further stated by the respondents / plaintiffs that after they purchased the property, they have put up wire fence around the entire suit property. Admittedly, the suit property includes four numbers as mentioned in the plaint. It is alleged by the respondents / plaintiffs that the defendant damaged the barbed wire fence and hence a police complaint was lodged against him during August 2010. It is stated by the plaintiffs that during enquiry in the said complaint, the defendant/appellant herein undertook that he will not interfere with the possession of the plaintiffs. Thereafter, the defendant issued a legal notice dated 27.07.2012 marked as Ex.A5 alleging that he has entered into a sale agreement with the plaintiffs on 01.06.2012 and paid an advance amount of Rs.9 lakhs, out of the total sale consideration of Rs.10 lakhs. Rebuting the same, the plaintiffs / respondents herein issued a reply notice dated 01.08.2012, which is marked as Ex.A6 and the same has been received by the defendant / appellant herein as evidenced by Ex.A7, postal acknowledgement. According to the plaintiffs, the said sale agreement was never executed by them and it was a forged one. The plaintiffs further state that subsequently on 18.08.2012, the defendant tried to interfere with the plaintiffs' possession and sought for execution of sale deed in his favour. Hence the plaintiffs have come forward with the suit.