MATHIALAGAN Vs. KUPPAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the plaintiff in O.S.No.817 of 1992 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Virudachalam and he has filed the suit for a declaration of his right over the suit property situate in Survey No.230/1C, 230/1C2 of Veppur Village, Virudachalam Taluk and also for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 5 from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment over the suit property.

(2.) The main contention of the plaintiff in O.S.No.817 of 1992 is that the suit property originally belonged to one Muthusamy and after his death, his son Nallan was in possession of the suit property. It is also his contention that the said Nallan along with other legal heirs of Muthusamy, executed a sale deed dated 005.1962 in favour of one Poovaal, the grand mother of the plaintiff. According to the plaintiff, since the property is with their possession right from 005.1962, he is entitled to the suit property by adverse possession and prescription. It is his further contention that the defendants 1 & 2 attempted to trespass into the suit property on 21.07.1992 and also attempted to cancel the patta, that was issued by the defendants 3 to 5.

(3.) The defendants 1 & 2 filed a written statement contending that the suit property was originally allotted by the government of Tamil Nadu under Adidravidar Scheme on 25.02.1933 in favour of one Muthan and the same was subsequently cancelled by the Revenue Divisional Officer on 11.08.1992. Therefore, the defendants would contend that the plaintiff cannot maintain the suit in O.S.No.817 of 1992, as the patta through which the plaintiff claims right over the suit property itself is cancelled by the Revenue Divisional Officer.