Sri.Rajesh Sivaramankutty submitted that the allegations made against his client are completely unsustainable because his client bona fide waited from 24.02.2005, being the date of Ext.A5 notice, hoping that Smt.V.P.Mary would provide the original of the prior title deed but that instead of doing so, she filed O.S.No.391/2005 before the Munsiff Court, Chittoor on 08.09.2005, alleging that the appellant - Sri.Muraleedharan had trespassed into the plaint schedule property. He says that the plaint in the said suit has been placed on record as Ext.B2 and shows that it was only in the said plaint, for the first time, that that Smt.V.P.Mary had disclosed that she has published the notice regarding the loss of her prior title deed in 'Malayala Manorama' on 25.03.2005, but without producing the same on record. He says that, pertinently, the said publication has not been produced before the Trial Court either and therefore, that the factum of the said publication has never been proved, leading his client to state affirmatively in the plaint that the assertion of such a publication is a falsity. He thus contended that since the original of the prior title deed had never been handed over to his client, even though as per the terms of Ext.A1
