- (1.) The defendant-appellant herein has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 17.02.1998 passed by a Single Judge of the High Court of Madras in SA No. 1191 of 1984. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has set aside the judgement and decree passed by the first appellate court and restored that of the trial court. The trial court had decreed the suit filed by the plaintiffs, the respondents herein, some of whom have died and are now represented by their legal representatives.
(2.) The dispute is in a very narrow compass: The property in dispute belonged to one Ramu Reddiar, s/o Muthu Reddiar. On 1.02.1951 Ramu Reddiar executed a registered settlement deed in favour of his daughter Pachai Ammal who became the absolute owner of the entire property. On 27.06.1953, Pachai Ammal executed three settlement deeds. By the first settlement deed, she settled 1.15 cents of land in favour of her eldest daughter Govindammal (1st plaintiff in the suit); by the second settlement deed, she settled 1.16 cents of land in favour of her younger daughter Muthalammal (2nd plaintiff) and her husband Ranganathan (3rd plaintiff); and by the third settlement, she settled 0.58 cents of land in favour of her brother's son i.e. Ramu alias Jeyaraman (4th plaintiff).
(3.) The defendant-appellant was in possession of the suit land. The respondents filed a suit being OS No. 148 of 1977, seeking declaration of their title to the suit land as well as its possession. The defence put up by the appellant was that Pachai Ammal after cancelling the first two settlement deeds in favour of her (i) eldest daughter, and (ii) younger daughter and her husband, executed registered sale deed in favour of Vallaisami Gounder for a sum of Rs. 600 in respect of two acres of land. It was also claimed that Aiyasami Gounder son of Vallaisami Gounder was in possession of the land in pursuance to the usufructuary mortgage executed by Ramu Reddiar under two "mortgage" documents dated 2.06.1949 and 5.06.1950 in respect of the two acres of land.;