SUBRAMANIAN Vs. KARUPPAYEE AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANTS are the appellants. The plaintiffs filed the suit for redemption of the mortgage dated 3.8.1950. The plaintiffs' case is as follows:- The suit properties belong to the plaintiffs. They have executed an Othi in favour of the first defendant in respect of the suit properties for Rs. 300 on 3.8.1950 for a period of five years. Possession was also handed over to the first defendant. The period prescribed for the Othi has expired. In spite of a request and notice the defendants have failed to hand over the suit properties and hence the suit.

(2.) THE defendants contended as follows:- THE defendants do not admit that the plaintiffs have title and possession in respect of the suit properties either or the date of the suit of prior to that. It is not admitted that the plaintiffs executed the Othi in favour of the defendants. THE suit properties are ancestral properties of the first defendant. THEy have been granted patta. Defendants 2 and 3 have acquired prescriptive title by way of adverse possession. THE plaintiffs should prove due execution and attestation of the Othi deed. THE correlation given by the plaintiffs for the suit properties by way of amendment of the plaint is not correct. THE boundaries given for the suit properties are wrong.