It is false to state that the suit properties were allotted to the share of Sundara Reddiyar in the oral partition which took place between the said Sundara Reddiyar and the second defendant. It is also false to state that in the year 1945, the said Sundara Reddiyar had orally sold the suit properties to the plaintiff for a sum of Rs.25/- from that date onwards, she has been in possession and enjoyment of the suit properties. In Item No.1 of the suit properties out of ten cents, the plaintiff is in possession of two cents only on the eastern side. The remaining eight cents on the western side and also the Item Nos.2 to 6 of the suit properties were allotted to the share of the second defendant under a registered partition deed in the year 1941 and also in the oral partition which took place between the second defendant and his brother. The second defendant had sold half of his properties to one Venkata Subramania Asari under a registered sale deed dated 06.12.1945 and the remaining half is the suit properties and he sold the same to the third defendant under a registered sale deed dated 31.08.1984 and from that date onwards, the third defendant is in possession and enjoyment of the same. Since the defendants 2 and 3 have been in possession and enjoyment of the suit properties for more than 40 years, they perfected title to the suit properties by adverse possession also. The allegation that the defendants 2 and 3 attempted to trespass into the suit properties in the first week of February, 1985 is false. After receipt of the lawyer's notice, the defendants 2 and 3 had sent reply suitably. The plaintiff is not in possession and enjoyment of the Item Nos.2 to 6 of the suit properties and therefore, the defendants 2 and 3 prayed to dismiss the above suit.
