S.MALINI Vs. B.SASIDHARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful defendants are the appellants before this Court. According to the appellants, the appellants were the tenants under one A.Kaliappan and that A.Kaliappan agreed to sell the land to the appellants verbally and that he has taken a sum of Rs. 75,000/-, after giving a promissory note. It is further contended that there was a suit in O.S.No.222 of 2005 before the Principal District Munsif Court, Puducherry, stating that the appellants shall not be evicted except under due process of law and that during the pendency of the said suit, Sale deed (Ex.A1) was entered between the said A.Kaliappan and the respondent herein. According to the appellants, the said suit in O.S.No.222 of 2005 was dismissed for default and that any agreement or sale deed entered is lis pendens and that the sale deed is invalid in the eye of law and even assuming it to be valid, the appellants cannot be evicted except in accordance with law and that the appellant being in occupation for over 30 years and that no one questioned their occupancy, in view of the adverse possession, the appellants shall not be disturbed.

(2.) The respondent, who is the plaintiff would contend that at no point of time, the appellants were tenant of one A.Kaliappan and even assuming so, when the sale deed was executed, the vacant possession of the property was handed over to the respondent and that the appellants could only be treated as a trespassers to the suit property and in the written statement, there is no pleading with regard to the tenancy and that it has been contended that there was a mortgage.

(3.) This Court has admitted the second appeal on 28.12.2012 on the following substantial questions of law:-