VEERASEKARAN Vs. DEVARASU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (PRAYER: Second Appeal against the Judgment and Decree dated 29.08.1997 rendered in A.S.No. 44/1996 on the file of the Principal District Court, Villupuram, confirming the Decree and Judgment dated 31.1.1995 rendered in O.S.No.786/1990 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Villpuram.) This Second Appeal arises out of the concurrent findings of the Courts below granting declaration and Permanent Injunction in respect of 'A' schedule properties and recovery of possession in respect of 'B' schedule properties. Unsuccessful Defendants are the Appellants in the Second Appeal. For convenience, the parties are referred as per their array in the suit.

(2.) THE suit 'A' schedule properties are (i) S.No.266/5 - 32 - cents out of 65 cents on the western side (ii) S.No.41/9 - measuring east-west 30', north-south 120' and suit 'B' schedule properties are (i) S.No.266/5 - 32 - cents out of 65 cents on the eastern side and (ii) S.No.41/9 - measuring east-west 30' , north-south 120'.

(3.) DENYING the plaint averments, Defendants have filed written statement contending that Chinnasamy was not mentally retarded and he was hale and healthy. According to the Defendants, Chinnasamy and his wife Alamelu Ammal executed a sale deed in favour of Narayanasamy Udayar under Ex.B2 dated 29.09.1938. The sale deed was in respect of half the extent of property of Chinnasamy being the half owner of the entire properties. Narayanasamy Udayar's son was one Ariyaputhiri. Narayanasamy Udayar was in possession and enjoyment of the half the extent and after Narayanasamy Udayar, Ariyaputhiri came into possession and enjoyment and thereafter, 1st Defendant being the only son of Ariyaputhiri came into possession and enjoyment of the property. The claim of adverse possession is denied and the claim of trespass is also denied.