BALAGURUSAMY NADAR Vs. CHINNA MARIAPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff in O.S.No.158 of 1993 is the appellant before this Court.

(2.) THE suit in O.S.No158 of 1993 was filed by the plaintiff for declaration to declare that the second item of the suit schedule property belongs to him and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant in the suit from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of Item No.2 of the suit schedule property.

(3.) IT is specifically pointed out by the plaintiff in the plaint that the defendant in the suit identified the vendors before the Registrar at the time of executing the sale deed dated 05-09-1980 by his brother in favour of Bagyalaxmi Ammal and he is also an attesting witness of the sale deed dated 05-09-1980. Therefore, the defendant is estopped through claiming ITem No.2 of the suit property as his own. IT is also his further case that the plaintiff purchased a vacant site situated on the southern side on 01-08-1990 from one Arunachala Nadar and others and he has been using the second item of the suit schedule property to reach that vacant site through the ITem No.1 of the property. While so, on 10-01-1993, the defendant in the suit, interfered with the plaintiff's possession of ITem No.2 of the suit property by tying his goats. When questioned by the plaintiff, the defendant is claiming rights over the property and therefore, the plaintiff filed the above suit, i.e., O.S.No.158 of 1993 for the aforesaid reliefs.