M. Duraiswamy, J. - (1.) THE above Second Appeal arises against the judgment and decree passed in A.S. No.155 of 1998, on the file of the Principal District Court, Tiruchirapalli confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.NO.181 of 1990 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thuraiyur. The defendants are the appellants and the respondent was the plaintiff. The plaintiff filed the suit in O.S. No.181 of 1990 for declaration, recovery of possession and mesne profits.
(2.) THE brief case of the plaintiff is as follows: According to the plaintiff, one Natesammal purchased the suit property under a registered sale deed dated 17.08.1973. Natesammal and her mother Thailammai Ammal were residing in the said house in their own right. Natesammal died intestate about 17 years ago leaving behind her mother as her sole heir. Her husband Chinnasamy Pandaram predeceased Natesammal. Therefore, Thailammai Ammal became the sole heir entitled to the suit property. On 05.10.1984, Thailammai Ammal executed a registered Will in favour of the plaintiff who is her granddaughter through her daughter Kullammal. The plaintiff was taking care of the deceased Thailammai Ammal during her last days and she died leaving the plaintiff to succeed to her intestate as per the said Will. Thailammai Ammal, when she was alive, leased out the house for a rent of Rs. 25/ - per month to one Kumarasamy and she was residing in another portion of the same house. The first defendant is the husband of the second defendant and they were living along with Kumarasamy who died intestate in the year 1987. After the death of Thailammai Ammal, the plaintiff demanded the first respondent to vacate and deliver the possession of the suit property. However the first respondent failed to vacate the premises. In these circumstances, the plaintiff filed the suit. The brief case of the defendants is as follows: The defendants while disputing the averments stated in the plaint, specifically denied the execution of the Will dated 05.10.1984 by Thailammai Ammal in favour of the plaintiff. The second defendant was adopted by Kumarasamy. Kumarasamy married Natesammal in the year 1973. The said Natesammal died on 22.07.1995 leaving behind Kumarasamy as her sole heir. The said Kumarasamy also died on 05.11.1987 and during his life time, he executed a Will dated 16.05.1980 in favour of the second defendant. After the death of Kumarasamy, the second defendant is in possession and enjoyment of the suit property. Since the second defendant and predecessors are in possession of the suit property more than 12 years, she has prescribed title by adverse possession. In these circumstances, the defendants prayed for dismissal of the suit.
(3.) BEFORE the trial Court, on the side of the plaintiff, two witnesses were examined and 15 documents Exs.A.1 to A.15 were marked and on the side of the defendants, two witnesses were examined and 19 documents Exs.B.1 to B.19 were marked. The trial Court, after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidences let in by both the parties, decreed the suit.;