MARI Vs. THANGAVEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants in O.S.No.186 of 2002 are the appellants. The said suit was filed by the respondents seeking declaration of title and consequential injunction.

(2.) According to the plaintiffs, the suit properties belonged to the plaintiffs' family and they have been in possession of the same for more than 20 years prior to the partition and about 20 years ago, they divided the suit property amongst themselves and are residing therein by constructing houses. Recognizing their possession, the Government also issued patta in the year 1995 in favour of the plaintiffs. While things stood thus, the 1st defendant had filed a suit in O.S.No.322 of 1988 against the father of the plaintiffs, Palani, seeking declaration of his title and permanent injunction. The Commissioner appointed in the said suit noted the physical features of the property and found that the plaintiffs in the present suit are in possession of the property.

(3.) Subsequently, the 1st appellant herein who was the plaintiff in O.S.No.322 of 1988 withdrew the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action. It is the further case of the plaintiffs that the defendants does not have any right over the suit property. The Patta issued in favour of the defendants in the year 1961 does not relate to the suit property. It is their further claim that the land that was assigned to the 1st defendant in the year 1961 by the Government was acquired in 1975 and road was formed therein and in lieu of the said land, the defendants were granted Patta in Survey No.417/36 and the defendants have constructed a house in the land assigned to them and are residing there. The defendants again filed another suit in O.S.No.289 of 1996 pursuant to the leave granted in O.S.No.322 of 1988 against the father of the plaintiff and the said suit came to be decreed ex-parte. The defendants are now attempting to interfere with the possession of the plaintiffs in execution of the decree obtained by them in O.S.No.289 of 2006. Therefore, the plaintiffs had filed the present suit in O.S.No.186 of 2002 seeking declaration of their title and consequential injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with their possession of the property.