MOHAN BREWERIES AND DISTILLERIES PVT LTD Vs. PALAVESAKONAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIRD defendant before the Principal District Munsif and third respondent before the Second Additional Sub Judge is the appellant in S.A. No.285 of 2002. Defendants 1 and 2 before the Munsif Court and respondents 1 and 2 before the Sub-court are the appellants in S.A. No.548 of 2002.

(2.) THE respondents in both these appeals had filed a suit for declaration that the document dated 17.5.1994 executed by the first and second defendants (M/s. Arumuga THEvar and Vadivoo Ammal) in favour of the third defendant (M/s. Mohan Breweries) in the suit is null and void and for a direction to the third defendant to deliver the possession of the suit property and for a mandatory injunction to remove all the structures and machineries and fixtures. THE suit was dismissed by the Munsif Court, but on appeal, the suit was decreed in favour of the respondents.

(3.) THE main submission of the learned senior counsel Mr. G. Masilamani is that the appellant in S.A. No.285 of 2002 had taken possession of the property and had constructed a huge wind mill at an enormous cost and the respondents, having kept quiet all these years, are estopped by acquiescence and cannot claim any right under equity. According to him, the respondents have not proved their relationship with Palavesakonar and their title to the property. It is argued that the rejection of Exs.B.l, B.3 to B.7 is illegal and that the respondents did not prove their title and possession and that the burden has been wrongly placed.