JUDGMENT :

This Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.110/2011 on the files of the District Court, Alappuzha, arose out of the judgment and decree in O.S.No.726/2009 on the files of the Additional Munsiff Court, Alappuzha. The appellant herein is the defendant in the above suit. The plaintiff is the sole respondent herein.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

3. I shall refer the parties in this appeal as 'plaintiff' and ‘defendant' for convenience.

4. As on 29.8.2019, my learned predecessor admitted this appeal raising the following substantial questions of law:

(i) Did not the plaintiff have the duty to give oral evidence when the dispute was whether plaint item no.2 property was part of the property of the plaintiff or the property of the defendant?

(ii) Was it proper to decree the suit, rejecting the claim of the defendant that he had perfected title by the law of limitation and adverse possession, on the sole ground that the defendant was paying tax in the name of the plaintiff?

(iii) When the defendant contended that he had no intention to sell any propert