MUTHIYA PILLAI Vs. RAMALINGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff filed O.S.No,335 of 1990 seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the Government poramboke land measuring 12 cents in his possession. THE other suit in O.S.No.114 of 1998 was filed by the plaintiff praying for recovery of possession of A schedule property and for permanent injunction with respect to B schedule property or in the alternative for recovery of possession of B schedule property.

(2.) AS the parties in both the appeals are one and the same and the suit properties are also found to be contiguous both the appeals are taken up for common disposal.

(3.) THE plaintiff in O.S.No,335 of 1990 would contend that the suit property is a Government poramboke land. It is a coconut thope. Regularising possession of the property, the Government issued 2C patta. THE entire poramboke land is in possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff. THE defendant does not have any right over the property nor has he been in possession and enjoyment of the same. THE plaintiff, having alleged that the defendant is making an attempt to encroach upon the suit property taking advantage of the enjoyment of the contiguous property owned by the plaintiff, sought for permanent injunction.