RAMASAMI CHETTI Vs. PARAMAN CHETTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff brought this suit to recover possession of the plaint lands with mesne profits from defendants alleging that he had purchased the lands from the former owners and had been unlawfully ousted from them by the defendants.

(2.) The defendants denied that plaintiff had any title to the land or any possession. They denied the alleged trespass and alleged that they had themselves been in possession for many years and had a title to the lands.

(3.) Issues were framed on these allegations and were all found in plaintiff's favour by the District Munsif who accordingly gave plaintiff a decree for possession and for past and future mesne profits. On appeal, the District Judge found that plaintiff had failed to prove a valid purchase from the former owners, but had shown that he had been dispossessed otherwise than by due course of law by the defendants within six months prior to the institution of the suit. He therefore confirmed the decree of the District Munsif so far as it restored plaintiff to possession and awarded him mesne profits, but he reversed it so far as it established plaintiff's title and dismissed the plaintiff's suit in that respect.