R.RAMESH Vs. D.PALANISAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants in O.S.No.21 of 2004, who had suffered a decree for permanent injunction at the hands of the Courts below are the appellants.

(2.) The suit was laid by the plaintiff / respondent seeking permanent injunction claiming that he is a cultivating tenant in respect of the suit properties measuring about 3.30 cents in Survey No.438/1 which has now been sub-divided as Survey Nos. 438/1A & 438/1B under the defendants 1 to 3. The defendants 4 to 6 are purchasers of the property from defendants 1 to 3. In support of his claim that he is a cultivating tenant, the plaintiff relied upon a lease deed dated 25.01.1976 and the order of the tenancy by Tahsildhar made in TR/1/1984 dated 12.04.1984 recording him as a tenant in respect of 2.50 acres in Survey No.438/1. It is claimed that he took 2.50 cents of land on lease from the first defendant under Ex.A1 dated 25.01.1976 and sometime in 1990, the defendants 2 and 3 also entered into a lease agreement with him in respect of their 2/6th share in the property and put him in possession. Therefore, according to him, he is a cultivating tenant in respect of the entirety of the property measuring 3.30 acres in Survey No.438/1 and claims that his possession should be protected. He would also claim that the purchasers namely, defendants 4, 5 and 6 are now attempting to dispossess him by using force. The plaintiff would claim that he cannot be evicted except under due process of law, since he is entitled to protection under the Tamilnadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1955.

(3.) The suit was resisted by the defendants denying the very lease. According to the defendants, they have been in possession of the property and claim that the plaintiff is a cultivating tenant was stoutly denied. At trial, the plaintiff examined himself as P.W.1 and examined two other witnesses as P.W.2 and P.W.3. He has also produced Exs.A1 to A14. The first defendant was examined as D.W.1 and the 5th defendant, A.S.Thangavel was examined as D.W.2. Exs.B1 to B28 were marked on the side of the defendants.