KABULATH BEEVI (DECEASED) Vs. MUTHATHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and Decree, dated 28.01.2000 made in A.S. No. 181 of 1996 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Ramanathapuram, confirming the Judgment and Decree, dated 26.09.1996 made in O.S. No. 111 of 1990 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Ramanathapuram.

(2.) It is an admitted fact that the plaintiff had filed the suit, seeking the relief of declaration of title and permanent injunction. The trial court, considering the oral and documentary evidence and the arguments advanced by both sides, decreed the suit as prayed for without costs. Aggrieved by which, the defendant preferred appeal against the legal representatives of the plaintiff. The first appellate court, by Judgment and Decree, dated 28.01.2000 confirmed the Judgment and Decree passed by the trial court and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by which, this Second Appeal has been preferred by the legal representatives of the defendant.

(3.) It is not in dispute that the defendant in the suit had purchased 15 cents of land in S. No. 241/10 in Valudoor Village, Ramanathapuram District, Velipatnam Sub District. Ex.B.1 is the original sale deed executed by the plaintiff in favour of the defendant Kabulath Beevi. As per the schedule of property, the properties described in Patta No. 1042 of the aforesaid village in S. No. 241/10, a total extent of 1 acre 47 cents on the western side, southern portion has been purchased. In the document, specific four boundaries are given. In the evidence both the parties have not disputed the aforesaid sale deed executed by the plaintiff on 22.10.1981 in favour of the defendant. In the plaint, the plaintiff, who was the vendor in Ex.B.1 has specifically stated that the schedule of property which is in S. No. 241/10, Valudoor Village consisting of 24 1/2 cents, out of which, after deducting 15 cents, that had been sold in favour of the defendant. However, he has stated the balance in his possession on the northern side was 9 1/2 cents, only the extent of the balance land stated as 9 1/2 cents by the plaintiff, is not admitted by the defendant.