VALAMBAL Vs. MATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal has been challenging the concurrent findings of the Courts below. The appellant is the plaintiff in the suit and the respondents are the defendants. The plaintiff filed a suit O.S. No.425 of 2003 before the District Munsif Court, Mayiladuthurai against the respondents for a bare injunction restraining the respondents from inteferring with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the suit B schedule property. Brief facts leading to the filing of the instant Second Appeal

(2.) It is the case of the plaintiff that the respondents have encroached upon the B schedule property belonging to the plaintiff. The respondents have also filed the written statement disputing the claim of the plaintiff and stating that the suit B schedule property belongs to a Temple and the defendants are the Lessee under the Temple.

(3.) The Trial Court dismissed the suit O.S. No.425 of 2003 filed by the plaintiff on the ground that there is no proper identification of the suit B schedule property by the plaintiff as seen from the description given in the schedule B to the plaint.