VEERAPPA GOUNDER Vs. DHANABAGYAM @ SEETHALAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal filed by the legal representatives of the first defendant and few other defendants is directed against the concurrent findings of the Court below allowing the suit filed for declaration possession and mesne profit.

(2.) The brief facts of the case is as follows :-

(3.) The first defendant contested the suit on the ground that since 1939, he is in possession and enjoyment of the property and Savithriammal executed the settlement deed Ex. B1, in his favour, but on analysing Ex.B1, the Trial Court found that out of 12 names found in the settlement deed marked as Ex.B1, the name of the first defendant is not found, but in the patta issued based on Ex.A1, the name of the first defendant is found along with 12 other persons. The Courts below has observed the first defendant, who was working as Karnam has influenced his counter part in-charge of Pandalampatti suit village and has included his name in the patta though he was not one of the settlee.