KANNAMMAL Vs. MANNAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unsuccessful plaintiffs in O.S. No. 383 of 1986 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Tiruvannamalai, have preferred the second appeal, aggrieved against the judgment and decree dated 16.12.1999 on the file of the District Court, Tiruvannamalai partly allowing the judgment and decree dated 21.4.1999 made in O.S. No. 383 of 1986.

(2.) The case in brief is as follows: The plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction. The suit property originally belonged to Tirumalai Reddiar, the father of the plaintiffs and it was his ancestral property. Out of loye and affection, Tirumalai Reddiar executed a registered settlement deed in favour of the plaintiffs. The settlement deed was duly executed, attested and registered. The plaintiffs also accepted the settlement deed and they were put in possession and enjoyment of the property. Patta was also transferred in their name and they paid kist. The portion originally belonged to the plaintiff's father was purchased by the defendants 1 and 3. The defendants are the Pangalies of the plaintiffs. The defendants were expecting that they would inherit the property of Tirumalai Reddiar, but now, after realising that the property has been settled in favour of his daughters, the defendants are now giving trouble. There is open space in front of the plaintiffs' house and the plaintiffs reach their house through the pathway. The property of the defendant is situate to the north and south of the pathway. Consequently, the defendants are preventing the plaintiffs from entering their house through the vacant site. During the pendency of the suit, the first plaintiff died leaving behind the third plaintiff as his legal heir. Hence, the suit

(3.) The defendants filed a written statement and contended that the plaintiffs' father Tirumalai Reddiar had no manner of right over the entire suit properties. The suit properties and other properties originally belonged to 1.Govindasamy Reddiar, 2. Rama Reddiar, 3. Lakshmana Reddiar, 4. Kesava Reddiar and 5. Kuppu Reddiar. They orally divided their properties including the suit properties long ago. In the partition, Govindasamy Reddiar was allotted the northern most 6 cents in S. No. 30/14. On the southern side of the share of Govindasamy Reddiar, 5 cents was allotted to Kuppu Reddiar, on further south. 3-1/2 cents was allotted to Kesava Reddiar and on further south, 15-1/2 cents was allotted to Lakshmana Reddiar. No share was allotted to Rama Reddiar in S. No. 30/14. Thus, Tirumalai Reddiar was allotted only 5 cents in S. No. 30/14 and he had been enjoying the same. Tirumalai Reddiar succeeded to only 5 cents in S. No. 30/14 and nothing more He constructed a thatched house on the southern portion of his site leaving the northern portion and eastern portion as vacant site. Out of the 5 cents, Tirumalai Reddiar sold the northern 2-1/2 cents to one Srinivasa Reddiar, son of Chinnasamy Reddiar, under the registered sale deed dated 25-2-1954. In the partition, the said 2-1/2 cents was allotted to the share of Veerasamy Reddiar who had been in possession and enjoyment. From Veerasamy Reddiar, D-1 purchased the northern 2-1/2 cents and other properties for a sum of Rs.3,052 under the registered sale deed dated 16.11.1979. After selling the northern 2-1/2 cents, Tirumalai Reddiar retained the south- ern 2-1/2 cents including the thatched house. D-1 constructed a terraced house measuring 22 feet north to south and 48 feet east to west on the northern portion. The remaining portion is lying vacant, which is being enjoyed by D-1. D-1 had been paying tax due to the Panchayat Board. In respect of item No. 1 of the property, the plaintiffs' father was entitled to only 2-1/2 cents and not 3-1/2 cents in S.No. 30/14. Veerasamy Reddiar sold 3-1/2 cents including the thatched house situate to one Venkatasamy Chettiar and Nagarathi- nammal for a sum of Rs. 200 under the registered document dated 23.3.1944. They were in possession and enjoyment of the properties. In turn, the father of D-2 and D-3 purchased a portion of the house from Venkatasamy Chettiar and Nagarathinammal under the registered sale deed dated 2.2.1945. The said Veerasamy Reddiar demolished the remaining thatched house which was situated on the southern portion and later sold to one Sivanandha Chettiar. Thus, the father of D-2 and D-3 became the absolute owner of the thatched house and site. Veerasamy Reddiar orally divided the house and site into two shares of which the northern share was allotted to D-2 and the southern share was allotted to D-3. Under the registered sale deed dated 3.1.1974, by mistake the survey number was given as 30/12 instead of 30/14. The boundaries have been correctly mentioned in the document and a rectification deed dated 9.6.1986 was also executed in favour of D-3 rectifying the mistake. D-3 is the absolute owner of the thatched house and site in S.No. 30/14 and he is in enjoyment of the same in his own right, paying tax etc.