K. DEVARAJ Vs. J. AMUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal Suit has been filed, by the Defendants, against the judgement and decree, dtd. 9/1/2015, made in OS.No.7473 of 2010, by the XVI Additional Judge, Chennai.

(2.) The suit was filed for declaration that the Plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit property and for permanent injunction and for costs.

(3.) The case of the Plaintiff is that the suit property originally belonged to Valliammal and she had two daughters, viz, Alamelu Ammal and Chinnakannnu Ammal. On the death of Valliammal, who died intestate, her daughters were entitled to equal shares in the property. Alamelu Ammal died leaving behind her son Harikrishnan, who died leaving behind his wife Gangammal, two sons viz., Duraikannu and Parthasarathy and two daughters, viz., Rukkuammal and Sarasammal. The legal heirs of Harikrishnan entered into a registered partition deed, dtd. 2/4/1987. As per the partition deed, the suit property belonged to the legal heirs of Harikrishnan and the sons were allotted 546 square feet each together with a 3 feet common pathway. The daughters, Rukkuammal and Sarasammal had executed a registered release deed on 13/3/1996, with respect to their share in favour of Duraikannu and Parthasarathy. On 7/7/1997 Parthasarathy and his wife had sold his share of 546 square feet on the Western side to Dharani. The said Dharani had sold 226 square feet along with a pathway to one D.Nagajyothi on 18/8/1997. The remaining 260 square feet along with a pathway was sold on the same date to the Plaintiff. On 24/9/1997, D.Nagajyothi had sold 226 square feet along with the pathway to the Plaintiff. On 24/9/1997, the Plaintiff had purchased the pathway measuring 42 square feet from V.Selvarani. Thus, the Plaintiff is the absolute owner of the property in Rs. No.2853/3,4,5. On 15/12/2000, A.S.Mani father of Dharani had executed a sale deed with respect to the suit property in favour of the 1st Defendant. Dharani had sold the property in favour of one Nagajyothi who in turn had sold the property in favour of the Plaintiff. On 18/8/1997, on the death of Dharani in 1991, his father A.S.Mani, claiming to be the sole legal heir of the deceased Dharani had executed a sale deed in favour of the 1st Defendant on 15/12/2000. Based on the sale deed executed by A.S.Mani, the 1st Defendant claims right and attempted to interfere with the suit property. In such circumstances, the suit had been filed, seeking the reliefs, as stated above.