JUDGMENT.— One Thangavelu Naicker was appointed by two brothers Muthukumara Chettiar and Somasundaram Chettiar to be a watchman or kavalkarar for their account cocoanut thope, Pulianthope and other clusters of trees in two survey numbers in which the own distinct portions. It is common ground that Thangavelu Naicker was paid Rs. 40 every year and was also entitled to take the ripe cocoanut leaves. His duties as kavalkarar included gathering, plucking and delivering the fruits of tamarind trees. In 1963, Thangavelu Naicker moved the Authorised Officer functioning under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural’ Land Record of Tenancy Rights Act for a declaration that he was a cultivating tenant under the two brothers. He did not succeed in obtaining an order in his favour and an appeal from the decision of the Authorised Officer also failed; In those proceedings, it was held that Thangavelu Naicker was not a tenant, much less a cultivating tenant of Muthukumara Chettiar and Somasundaram Chettiar. Thereafter, Thangavelu Naicker filed O. S. No. 191 of 1972 against the owners of the property, asking for a permanent injunction restraining the owners from evicting him from the premises. It may be obse

Click Here to Read the rest of this document