The admissibility of secondary evidence under the Evidence Act, 1872, and the drawing of adverse inference against a party for not explaining a document in court.

The defendants who have lost before both the courts below are the appellants.

2. The first respondent (since deceased)/plaintiff instituted the suit for declaration of title to the suit property and for permanent injunction against the appellants herein/defendants. The trial court having considered the recorded evidence and upon hearing both sides granted the decree as prayed for with costs. The appellants herein filed the first appeal before the Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore and the learned Subordinate Judge after considering the evidence both oral and documentary and upon hearing the arguments on either side dismissed the appeal with costs by confirming the judgment and decree passed by the trial court. Hence, this Second Appeal.

3. The facts leading to the filing of the suit may be set out briefly hereunder:-

(a) The plaintiff purchased the suit property from Renganayaki Ammal and Singaravelu Padayachi for Rs.10,000/- on 14.8.1980 by means of a registered sale deed and since then, he has been in possession and enjoyment of the same by paying kist, etc. The suit property originally belonged to one Singaravelu Padayachi and he sold the same on 10.4.1978 for Rs.8,000/- to Renganayaki Ammal, wife of Palanivel Padayachi and she was put in possession of the same. On 13.4.1978, the said Renganayaki Ammal executed a reconveyance deed in favour of her vendor Singaravelu Padayachi in respect of the same property. Since Singaravelu Padyachi informed Renganayaki Ammal that he is no longer interested in repurchasing the property and inasmuch as Renganayaki Ammal was in need of money for her expenses, she sold the property to the plaintiff under a registered sale deed dated 14.8.1980 for valuable consideration of Rs.10,000/- and the plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the suit property in his own right by paying kist, etc.

(b) The defendants 1 and 2 are the sons of 3rd defendant and they have been interfering with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the suit property without any right or title to same. Hence the plaintiff's title to the suit property has to be declared and consequently, the defendants have to be restrained by means of permanent injunction from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property.

4. The defendants 2 and 3 adopted the averments put forth by the 1st defendant in his written statement and they are briefly as follows:-

(a) The suit property originally belonged to Rathina Padayachi, the grand father of the defendants 1 and 2 and therefore the allegation that the suit property originally belonged to Singaravelu Padayachi, the paternal uncle of the plaintiff is not true. Defendants 1 and 2, minor Ukkiravel and Jeyakodi and Malarkodi are the sons and daughters of Dharmalinga Padayachi, while one Mangalakshmi Ammal is the only daughter of Singaravelu Padayachi. The 3rd defendant is the wife of Dharmalinga Padayachi. The said Rathina Padyachi died about 50 years back leaving behind considerable income rendering joint family properties which devolved upon Singaravelu Padayachi and Dharmalinga Padayachi, who constituted the joint family. In all the joint family properties, Singaravelu was entitled to undivided 1/2 share and Dharmalinga Padayachi entitled to undivided 1/2 share. Dharmalinga Padayachi, father of defendants 1 and 2 and husband of 3rd defendant died as undivided member of the joint family in or about 1974 and thereafter defendants 1 and 2 and the said Ukkiravelu continued to be the members of undivided joint family along with senior paternal uncle Singaravelu Padayachi. The 3rd defendant and her daughters became entitled to specific share as co-owners in the undivided half share belonging to Dharmalinga Padyachi. Thus, defendants 1 and 2 and their brother Ukkiravelu are the joint family members and the 3rd defendant and her daughter as co-owners have been in possession and enjoyment of the joint family properties including the suit property. Singaravelu Paday