VEERASAMY Vs. RUKMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Second Appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dated 25.02.2016 made in A.S.No.21 of 2013 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Vridhachalam, confirming the judgment and decree dated 15.10.2012 made in O.S.No.487 of 2006 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Vridhachalam.

(2.) The appellants are defendants and respondent is the plaintiff in O.S.No.487 of 2006 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Vridhachalam. The respondent filed the said suit for declaration of title, recovery of possession and for mesne profit. The suit was decreed, granting relief of declaration and possession and held that mesne profit is to be decided in the proceedings under Order 20, Rule 12 of C.P.C. The appeal A.S.No.21 of 2013 filed by the appellants was dismissed. Against the concurrent findings of the Courts below, the appellants have come out with the present Second Appeal.

(3.) The suit property and other properties originally belonged to Chellaperumal, father of the respondent and first appellant. The said Chellaperumal, by the deed of settlement dated 19.01.1983, settled the property on his wife, Visalakshi Ammal, mother of the respondent and first appellant. The said Visalakshi Ammal, by the deed of settlement dated 14.01996, settled the suit property on the respondent. Apart from the respondent and first appellant, their parents had one more son and two daughters. Their mother Visalakshi Ammal settled separate properties on each of her children, including first appellant for their exclusive possession and enjoyment. The respondent accepted the settlement and she is in possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The settlement came into effect on the same date. The respondent is residing in K.Nallur village, along with her husband. The respondent gave money to her elder brother, the first appellant to pay kist to the suit property on her behalf. The first appellant fraudulently paid the kist in his name. The first appellant on misrepresentation got patta in his name. On coming to know the same, the respondent has taken steps for cancellation of patta and said proceedings are pending. The respondent came to know about the same in Tamil month of "ij", 2004. When the respondent questioned the first appellant, he along with his two sons who are the appellants 2 and 3 trespassed into the suit property. The respondent approached the first appellant directly and also through panchayat for vacating the suit property and hand over the same to the respondent. The first appellant refused to vacate the suit property. Hence the suit was filed.