M. RATHINASAMY Vs. G. VAITHIYANATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Defendant in the suit in O.S. No. 2 of 1999 is the appellant. The suit is for recovery of property shown as "ABCD" in the suit sketch from the defendant and to hand over the possession to the plaintiff. The consequential prayer sought for is the past profit from the date of suit till the date of delivery of vacant possession with costs.

(2.) Gist of the plaint averment: The suit mentioned property is 'inam punjai' land. It belongs to 'Sri Thala Pureeswaraswami Devesthanam'. East of the suit property is a natham land which the plaintiff got through the partition deed dtd. 12/07/1966. A larger extent of 'inam punjai' land inclusive of this suit property is in enjoyment and possession of the plaintiff. Prior to the year 1966, his predecessors were enjoying the 'inam punjai'. The 'inam punjai' was made over to the plaintiff by one Ramachandran Mudaliar on 13/09/1985 and the possession was handed over to the plaintiff. Since the year 1985, the plaintiff paying the 'paguthi rent' to the devasthanam regularly. On the North of the suit property, the property of the defendant is located.

(3.) Gist of the written statement: In the written statement, the defendant has contended that the document dtd. 13/09/1985 alleged to have been executed by one Ramachandran Mudaliar is a false document. The said, Ramachandran Mudaliar was never in possession and enjoyment of the suit property. In a partition deed dtd. 12/07/1966, the property of the defendant shown as the East and South boundaries. In the earlier suit in O.S. No. 23 of 1986, the trial Court as well as the First Appellate Court have held that through the made over document executed by Ramachandran Mudaliar on 13/09/1985, though the plaintiff has proved the 'paguthi right' of Ramachandra Mudaliar was transferred, he has not proved that the possession of the suit extent land was in enjoyment by Ramachandra Mudaliar and from him, the plaintiff continue to possess and enjoy the suit land. The matter has been already heard and decided by the trial Court and the First Appellate Court. The judgement of the earlier suit act as res judicata. Therefore, the suit is liable to be dismissed.