SETHU PADAYACHI Vs. PERIASWAMI PADAYACHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is the appellant. He filed a suit for recovery of possession of the suit property after removal of the superstructure put up by the defendant and for past mesne profits of Rs. 300 and costs. The facts are these:

(2.) The point for consideration is as to whether the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to decide the area covered by the "kudiyiruppu" of a tenant.

(3.) S. 2 clause (6) of the Madras Occupants of Kudiyiruppu (Protection from Eviction) Act of 1961 defines a "kudiyiruppu" to mean -