his claim of title to the same as pleaded by him and as abovenoted, the plaintiff relies upon the sale deed dated 22.10.1990 for claiming title to the first item of the plaint schedule properties. At the foremost, the plaintiff has not established as to how his vendor is entitled to claim title to the extent of 5 ½ cents in survey No.6/5. Though in the plaint, the plaintiff has come forward with the case that he has acquired title to the first item of the suit properties by way of the sale deed dated 22.10.1990, during the course of his evidence, the plaintiff would put forth the case that much prior to the abovesaid sale deed, he has purchased the first item by way of oral sale from his vendor viz., Veeramuthu and in recognition of the oral sale effected in the year 1968, according to the plaintiff, the sale deed dated 22.10.1990 marked as Ex.A1 has been executed in his favour. However, as rightly found by the Courts below, there is nothing contained in Ex.A1 sale deed that the said sale deed has been executed in favour of the plaintiff in recognition of the oral sale effected in the year 1968. Therefore, the plea put forth by the plaintiff during the course of his evidence that he had orally purchased the first item in the year 1968 itself and only in recognition thereof, Ex.A1 had come to be executed in his favour cannot be accepted, more particularly, when as abovenoted, the plaintiff has failed to establish his vendor's title to the said property and furthermore, when the plaintiff has not pleaded any oral sale with reference to the said item from his vendor in the year 1968. The plaintiff relies upon Ex.A2 patta said to have been issued in his favour in respect of the first item, however, as rightly found by the Courts below, Ex.A2 patta is found to be issued in respect of the entire extent of Survey No.6/5. That apart, when admittedly the patta in respect of the first item i.e. total extent of 41 cents is standing only in the name of the defendants viz., the first defendant, it does not stand to reason as to how the patta had come to be issued in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the first item of the plaint schedule properties. It has not been established by the plaintiff that the patta marked as Ex.A2 has been issued in his favour validly after due notice to the defendants and inviting their objections with reference to the same. On the other hand, it is found that the patta had been issued in favour of the defendants in the year 1974 itself in respect of 41 cents of land in survey No.6/5 and the other documents of possession have also been placed by the defendants evidencing that the entire extent of 41 cents is in their possession and enjoyment continuously.
