PREMA RAMKUMAR Vs. RATHINASABAPATHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 11th defendant in O.S.No.204 of 1999, who suffered a decree for recovery of possession and demarcation of the property, allotted to the plaintiff under the partition deed dtd. 5/6/1981 is the appellant herein. The plaintiffs sought for relief of recovery of possession of the "B" Schedule property and for demarcation of the "A" Schedule Property and for permanent injunction and restraining the defendants 5 to 12 from interfering the peaceful possession of the suit property.

(2.) According to the plaintiff / first respondent herein, the suit property originally belonged to him and his brother Paramasivan. In the partition deed dtd. 5/6/1981, the suit "A" Schedule property was allotted to the plaintiff and the same was shown in the "B" Schedule to the said partition deed. While so, the defendants claiming that his brother Paramasivam and his son, the first defendant have sold a portion of the property that was allotted to him in the partition deed dtd. 5/6/1981 have encroached upon two acres and 37 cents of land in Survey No.833/1, the plaintiff sought for the aforesaid reliefs.

(3.) The suit was resisted by the 11th defendant, who is the purchaser from the fifth defendant. Contending that Paramasivan and his son / the first defendant had sold the property to the 12 th defendant represented by the fifth defendant vide sale deeds dtd. 31/1/1990 and on 28/4/1994. The 5th defendant in turn sold the property purchased by him under the abovesaid two sale deeds to the 11th defendant on 4/3/1999 which were marked as Ex.A.14 and Ex.A.15. The defendants claimed that the deceased Paramasivan Pillai and his son were in possession of the property and considering the same, patta was also issued in the name of the deceased Paramasivan Pillai. It is also the further contention of the defendants that the suit property has not been properly described. Though the plaintiff seeks possession of the "B" Schedule property, the boundaries of the "B" Schedule has not been set out in the plaint. On the above pleadings, the 11th defendant sought for dismissal of the suit. The other defendants adopted the wrtitten statement of the 11th defendant.