JAYARAMAN Vs. KRISHNASAMI PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The suit for declaration and injunction was decreed by the trial Court and on appeal, the same was confirmed by the first appellate Court. Aggrieved by the concurrent finding of the Courts below, the defendants are before this Court as appellants.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties are described as per their rank and status shown in the original suit.

(3.) The brief facts of the case is that the plaintiff, 1st defendant and one Rajangam are sons of one Muthusamy Pillai. The suit property originally belonged to one Thillaikannu @ Periyanayagam, S/o Chinnasamy. On 21.03.1953, Muthusamy purchased undivided half share from the said Thillaikannu @ Periyanayagam and his son Alphonse. This property and other properties were jointly enjoyed by Muthusamy and his sons namely, Krishnasamy Pillai-plaintiff, Jayaraman-first defendant and Rajangam. There was an oral partition among them 30 years ago. The first defendant Jayaraman was allotted ¼ share in the joint family property. Likewise, the plaintiff Krishnasamy Pillai and his brother Rajangam were allotted each ¼ share in the joint family property, which was jointly enjoyed by the plaintiff Krishnasamy Pillai and Rajangam. Some time later, that was divided between them. The undivided share in the suit property was allotted to their father Muthusamy. It was enjoyed by him along with his co-sharer Pachaiyappa Pillai. The share of Muthusamy Pillai was brought under Court auction purusant to the decree passed in O.S.No.1021 of 1973. Pachaiyappa Pillai has purchased share of Muthusamy Pillai through court auction dated 02.01.1974. Later, Pachaiyappa Pillai and his son Govindaraj sold the property to the plaintiff Krishnasamy Pillai vide, sale deed dated 02.11.1976. Till 1980, it was jointly enjoyed by the plaintiff and his father. In 1980, an oral partition was effected between Muthusamy Pillai and his sons the plaintiff-Krishnasamy Pillai and the first defendant-Jayaraman. The undivided half share of the suit property was allotted to the plaintiff and from that day onwards, the plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the suit property and also paying tax. Thus, the plaintiff being in possession and enjoyment of the entire suit property for more than 25 years, by purchase as well as by continuous enjoyment he has perfected the title over the property. The first defendant has stealthily inserted the survey number of the suit property in the patta issued in his name. Taking advantage of it, the defendants are trying to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the suit property. Hence, suit for declaration and injunction was filed.