ORDER: Plaintiffs 2 to 4 in O.S. No.63 of 1985, on the file of the District Munsif, Pattukottai are the appellants in the second appeal.

2. One Duraimanickam filed the suit for a permanent injunction restraining the respondent/ defendant from interfering with his possession and enjoyment of the suit property of an extent of 0.39 acre with a thatched shed, 30 palmyrah trees, 1 tamarind tree and neem tree in S.No.114-9 in Ambalapattu North Village, Orthanadu Taluk, Thanjavur District, on the following averments:

The suit property belonged to him ancestrally and in an oral family arrangement between him and his brothers about 20 years prior to the suit, the suit property among other properties fell to his share and since then he had been in exclusive possession and enjoyment in his own right as absolute owner. Patta had been granted for the suit land under Patta No.67 and he had also been paying kist etc. to the Government. There were 30 palmyrah trees on the western side in the suit land which were reared, even during the lifetime of his father and after partition, they were in his exclusive possession and a small shed in the middle of the suit land with a trident installed as an incarnation of Lord Muruga was also there and he had been cultivating generally crops and vegetables in the rest of the land. The defendant, who was the adjacent owner on the west and had nothing to do with the suit property, had been picking up quarrel with Murugaiyan with a view to purchase the suit land and annex it to his property and as Murugaiyan refused to part with the land, the defendant was attempting to trespass into the suit land and remove the shed and cut and carry away the standing trees. On 18.2.1985 the defendant came along with his men and threatened to demolish the shed. Murugaiyan somehow managed to prevent the high-handed action of the defendant. However, as he apprehended that the threat would materalise at any time, the suit came to be filed.

3. Pending suit, Duraimanickam died, his sons came on record as plaintiffs 2 to 4 and continued the suit.

4. The defendant resisted the suit contending inter alia as follows:

The line/ ridge on the eastern side of his property belonged to him. He planted palmyrah trees about 45 years prior to the suit and they and grown into big trees. There were about 44 trees as on date of the suit. The defendant was entitled to 55 Kuzhies on the northern side in 55 cents in old S.No.114/4 and New Survey No.114/8. The share immediate south of 55 Kuzhies belonged to his brother Adaikalam Mathurar and the southern most share belonged to his other brother Rengasamy as per an oral partition among the brothers. The brothers got the palmyrah trees on the eastern side corresponding to their share and they are in possession of the land allotted to them and the palmyrah trees. Adaikalam Mathurar sold his share in the middle to the defendant’s wife Saradha on 6.8.1963 along with the palmyrah trees. Rengasamy Mathurar also sold his share on 27.5.1969 to the defendant’s wife Saradha. The trees were not mentioned in the sale deed. The trees which were in the enjoyment of Rengasamy were still in his enjoyment. In 55 cents paddy and ground nut had been raised continuously. The palmyrah trees on the eastern ridge had become the absolute property of the defendant by reason of the continuous possession of the defendant, his brothers and his wife Saradha. The defendant did not know the boundaries or the survey numbers. The suit had been filed for the palmyrah trees. The plaintiffs had to prove their case. It was not true to say that even during the life time of Duraimanickam there were 30 palmyrah trees. Neither Murugaiyan nor his predecessors- in-title were in enjoyment of the palmyrah trees at any time. About 7 years prior to the suit, Murugaiyan claimed that the palmyrah trees were, in his land. There was a Panchayat in the presence of Kayavarnakattiyar and Marimuthu Mathurar. In the panchayat, it was decided that Murugaiyan sh

Click Here to Read the rest of this document