GANTHIMATHI AMMAL Vs. SAPRUDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of possession of the property in s. No. 1282/1 as against the defendants in O. S. No. 39 of 1989. Having suffered a decree for recovery of possession both before the Trial Court as well as before the appellate court, the defendants have preferred S. A. No. 1305 of 1995. The plaintiff, who laid a suit for permanent injunction with respect to the remaining part of the property in S. No. 1282/1, having been non-suited by the trial Court as well as by the first appellate court, preferred S. A. No. 1264 of 1995.

(2.) TO avoid confusion, the parties are referred to as plaintiff and defendants as the case may be as the plaintiff has filed S. A. No. 1264 of 1995 and the defendants have filed S. A. No. 1305 of 1995.

(3.) THE plaintiff in both the suits has contended that the property comprised in s. No. 1282/1, Ward No. 1, Block No. 31 measuring 56106 sqft absolutely belonged to one Kulandaivelu Chettiar who purchased the same by means of a registered sale deed dated 12th October 1946 from one Govindasamy Nadar and his minor son ramaian and another unnamed minor son. The patta for the property stands in the name of Kulandaivelu Chettiar who died leaving behind his wife Gandhimathi as the only legal heir. The plaintiff Gandhimathi Ammal, being the sole heir of kulandaivelu Chettiar, has been in possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The defendants, taking advantage of the fact that they are residing closeby the suit property, encroached upon 2223 sqft in S. No. 1282/1. The remaining extent of the suit property has been in possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff. Therefore, the plaintiff has filed a suit in O. S. No. 39 of 1989 praying for recovery of possession of 2223 sqft in S. No. 1282/1 and for permanent injunction with respect to the remaining portion of the property.