Second Appeal dismissing suit for declaration and permanent injunction regarding title to a property. Court upheld lower courts' findings that plaintiffs failed to prove title as patta was cancelled and reissued in respondent's name. Appeal dismissed.
Second Appeal dismissed. No order as to costs. Connected miscellaneous petition closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
S.A.(MD).No.295 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 30.03.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
S.A.(MD).No.295 of 2021 and C.M.P.(MD).No.4015 of 2021
1.Pooranam (Died)
2.Ramamoorthi
3.Neelamegam
4.Nagajothi ... Appellants/Appellants/Plaintiffs
(Appellants 3 and 4 are brought on record as LRs of the deceased 1st appellant vide Court order dated 23.12.2021 made in C.M.P.(MD).Nos.10805, 10807 and 10809 of 2021 in S.A.(MD).No.295 of 2021)
Vs.
Malik ...Respondent/Respondent/Defendant
Prayer : Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of CPC to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 27.11.2020 passed in A.S.No.5 of 2017 on the file of the Honourable Subordinate Judge, Ramanathapuram confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 22.12.2016 passed in O.S.No.124 of 2010 on the file of the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Rameswaram.
1/8
S.A.(MD).No.295 of 2021
For Appellants : Mr.P.Mani Anandh For Respondent : Mr.Vashik Ali for Mr.D.Nallathambi
JUDGMENT
This Second Appeal has been filed challenging the concurrent findings of the Courts below. The plaintiffs in the suit in O.S.No.124 of 2010 on the file of
the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Rameswaram are the appellants herein. During the pendency of the Second Appeal, the first appellant died and the third and fourth appellants were brought on record as her legal representatives.
2/8
S.A.(MD).No.295 of 2021
3/8
S.A.(MD).No.295 of 2021
4/8
S.A.(MD).No.295 of 2021
Trial Court, the plaintiffs filed eight documents, which were marked as exhibits A1 to A8 and the first plaintiff was examined as a witness (P.W.1). On the side of the defendant, 16 documents were filed, which were marked as exhibits B1 to B16 and two witnesses were examined on his side, namely, the defendant himself as D.W.1 and one Sulaiman as D.W.2. The Advocate Commissioner was also appointed during the pendency of the suit and the reports of the Advocate Commissioner were marked as Court exhibits, namely, Ex.C1 and Ex.C2.
5/8
S.A.(MD).No.295 of 2021
onwards, as seen from Ex.B10, the certified copy of the sale deed dated 21.08.1912 executed in favour of Syed Kathi Rawuthar. Subsequent to the said document, the defendant has traced his title by virtue of other documents, which include revenue records, which have been marked as exhibits on the side of the defendant. The defendant has also filed the patta standing in his name for the suit schedule property, which has been marked as Ex.B9, which was issued pursuant to the patta transfer order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ex.B13. Therefore, the Trial Court has rightly held that the plaintiffs have not proved their title and therefore, they are not entitled for the relief of declaration and permanent injunction. This Court does not find any infirmity in the findings of the Trial Court.
6/8
S.A.(MD).No.295 of 2021
placed on record by both the parties. There are no substantial questions of law involved in this Second Appeal and the substantial questions of law raised in the grounds of the Second Appeal by the appellants are only factual issues which have been correctly considered by the Courts below. In the result, there is no merit in this Second Appeal.
as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition stands closed.
30.03.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Lm
To
7/8
S.A.(MD).No.295 of 2021
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
Lm
S.A.(MD).No.295 of 2021
30.03.2023
8/8
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellants have proved their title to the suit property despite the cancellation of their patta.
Whether the concurrent findings of fact by the Trial Court and Lower Appellate Court on title and possession are tenable.
Neelamegam
Nagajothi
Malik
Abdul Quddose
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
