cents to the 1st defendant on 31.12.2001 and in the remaining 6 cents, the plaintiff is entitled for title, but they have fabricated the document on 07.03.2002 without knowledge of plaintiff. Though he is in possession of the property, only in the year of 2009, he came to know that the suit property was conveyed through a sale deed dated 31.12.2001 by the 2nd defendant fraudulently. However, the 2nd defendant would submit that entire extent of 12 cents was allotted into share of 2nd defendant much prior to the partition held on 12.08.1993, accordingly, he sold the property, thereby denied the plaintiff's claim. Furthermore, the 2nd defendant also acquired the prescriptive title over the suit property as if he enjoyed the same from the year of 1980 to the knowledge of plaintiff, it was not proved by D2. Both parties have adduced evidence before the trial court. Accordingly, the trial court framed issues. On considering the facts and evidence on record, finally the trial court granted the relief of declaration and since the plaintiff has not proved the possession, the relief of permanent injunction was not granted. However, the plaintiff has claimed the alternative relief of recovery of possession by way of amendment. Accordingly, it was granted, since the plaintiff is a true owner.
