SENTHILKUMAR Vs. JEYALAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal is filed by the first defendant challenging the reversing judgment made in A.S.No.17 of 2011 by the Sub Court, Pudukkottai, in and by which, the learned Subordinate Judge had reversed the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.124 of 2006 on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur. The parties are arrayed in the same status as in the suit.

(2.) The facts in brief necessary for disposal of this Second Appeal are as follows:

(3.) The first defendant filed a written statement, which was adopted by the second defendant, in which it is categorically stated that the plaintiff is no longer in possession of the suit property and it is also contended that the lease agreement that was entered into by Ramasamy with the plaintiff is a fictitious one. The first defendant would contend that the original owner Ramasamy had executed a power of attorney in favour of one Meenakshi on 06.07.1992. By virtue of the said power of attorney deed, Meenakshi had sold the suit property to the first defendant on 01.09.2004 and that from the date of purchase, they have been in possession and enjoyment of the same.