RAMALINGAM (DECEASED) Vs. RENU GOUNDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful defendants 1 to 3 are the appellants herein. The first respondent/ plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.815 of 1988 for declaration of the title to the suit property and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, servants from interfering with the peaceful possession of the suit property.

(2.) The case of the first respondent/ plaintiff is as follows: The suit properties and other properties were the absolute properties of the plaintiff's father Ariya Gounder, item nos.2 to 6 being his ancestral properties while item no.1 was purchased by him from one Govindachetty vahairs under a registered sale deed dated 29.08.1940. The plaintiff further states that patta for item nos.1 to 3 is standing exclusively in the name of the plaintiff's father Ariya Gounder under the patta no.332 while the patta for item nos.4 to 6 stands jointly in the name of Ariya Gounder and Chinna Ariya Gounder under patta no.728. The plaintiff's father Ariya Gounder died intestate in or about 1965 leaving behind the plaintiff and his two brothers Ramachandran Gounder and Gopal Gounder/ defendants 4 and 5/ respondents 2 and 3 herein as his legal heirs. After the demise of Ariya Gounder, the plaintiff and his brothers/ defendants 4 and 5 orally effected partition in or about 1968, in which the suit properties fell to the share of the plaintiff. Ever since the date of oral partition, the plaintiff has been in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the suit properties paying kist and other revenue taxes to the Government.

(3.) The plaintiff further states that he has installed a 5 H.P.Electric Motor Pumpset in the well and he is irrigating his lands by taking water from the well. The defendants 1 to 3/ appellants herein are third parties and they have no manner of right, title or interest over the suit properties and they say that they would disturb the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties and would trespass into the suit schedule properties. Hence, the plaintiff filed the suit for the relief stated above.