MUTHUKRISHNA NADAR Vs. KANNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful defendant is the appellant. The suit is filed by the plaintiff for declaration that he is the absolute owner of the suit property and for delivery of vacant possession of the same.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff is that he is the owner of the suit property by virtue of the sale deed dated 26.07.1990 executed by the defendant/appellant in his favour for a sale consideration of Rs.37,500/-. At the time of execution of the sale, the defendant/ appellant was in possession of the property. Therefore, it was agreed that he would continue to be in possession for three (3) months and he would vacate the same on expiry of the said period. The defendant/ appellant did not comply with the said undertaking, instead, he filed a suit in O.S.No.230 of 1991 before the I Additional District Munsif, Puducherry, for permanent injunction restraining the plaintiff/ respondent herein from interfering with the suit property. The said suit was dismissed on 30.04.1992 holding that the plaintiff therein was not entitled for an order of permanent injunction, as prayed for. Despite the same, the defendant had not handed over possession of the suit property to the plaintiff/respondent. Hence, the suit in O.S.No.105 of 1994 had been filed.

(3.) The suit is resisted by the defendant/appellant contending that originally the property belonged to one Dharmalingam and he entered into an agreement to sell the suit property along with a thatched house situated thereon in favour of the defendant's wife Saraswathi. Accordingly, the two sale deeds were executed on 27.01.1989, one for the land and the other for the superstructure. Thereafter, the defendant/appellant sold the property on 26.07.1990 to the plaintiff/respondent for a sale consideration of Rs.37,000/-. But the contention of the defendant/appellant is that the plaintiff/ respondent had paid only a sum of Rs.20,000/- and the balance sum of Rs.17,000/-, is yet to be paid by the plaintiff/respondent and that he continued to reside with his sons in the suit property.