KRISHNAVENI AMMAL Vs. SUNDARALAKSHMI AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal at the instance of the defendant in O.S. 366 of 1977, District Munsif Court, Thanjavur, has been entertained on the following question of Law -

(2.) The suit in O.S. 366 of 1977 was instituted by the respondents herein for a declaration of their title to the suit property and for recovery of possession and a sum of Rs. 300 by way of damages for use and occupation from the appellant. The suit property is a house situate in S. No. 19 in Melaveli Reddipalayam village, Thanjavur taluk. According to the case of the respondents, the suit property originally belonged to Ramalinga Reddiar, deceased husband of the first respondent ancestrally and he had been in possession and enjoyment of the suit property till his death on 30-11-1975, and, thereafter, the respondents succeeded to the property as full owners. The appellant, according to the respondent, was a tenant under the deceased Ramalinga Roddiar and thereafter under the respondents, having entered into an oral tenancy from January 1972 on a monthly rent of Rs. 15 payable on or before the 5th of succeeding English calendar month. The further case of the respondents was that the appellant had paid the rents regularly to deceased Ramalinga Reddiar till his death on 34-11-1975, and thereafter, she did not pay any rent at all. Thereupon, a notice was issued to the appellant demanding payment of the rent, for which the appellant sent a reply notice denying the title of the respondents. In view of this the respondents issued a notice on 10-7-1977 purporting to terminate the lease in favour of the appellant for forfeiture by denial of title. It was under these circumstances, the respondents instituted the suit praying fem the reliefs set out earlier.

(3.) In the written statement filed by the appellant, she denied that the suit property belonged to Ramalinga Reddiar ancestrally and that he had been in possession and enjoyment of the same till his death on 30-11-1975. The tenancy under Ramalinga Reddiar as well as the respondents was also denied. The payment of rent attributed to the appellant till the death of Ramalinga Reddiar was also denied by the appellant. According to the case of the appellant, her father took on lease a portion of the vacant land from the mother-in-law of the 1st respondent by registered rent deed dated 9-7-1936 and a superstructure was put up therein by him and subsequent to the rent deed and the putting up of the superstructure, the mother-in-law of the first respondent stopped exercising rights of ownership over the property and the father of the appellant had been exercising such rights for over decades and had been enjoying the property as absolute owner and had perfected title by adverse possession. The appellant thus claimed that after her father's death, she had been exercising rights of ownership over the property as absolute owner. The appellant also denied the claim of the respondents for recovery of damages for use and occupation as claimed.