1. The second appeal has been filed by the defendant in O.S.No.53 of 1979 on the file of the District Munsif, Thiruvaiyaru, who succeeded before the learned Trial Judge, but lost before the learned Sub-ordinate Judge at Thanjavur in A.S.No.18 of 1983, challenging the judgment and decree passed by the learned first appellate judge.

.2. The suit has been filed by the respondent / plaintiff f or more recovery of possession as per plaint plan ABCB after removing the shed and fence. The case of the plaintiff is that based on the purchase said to have been made under Ex.A.1 and A2 the defendant contested the claim and disputed the right of the plaintiff for the relief of recovery of possession asserting title in himself by virtue of the sale deed marked as Ex.B2. A commissioner was also appointed and there are more than one report and plan submitted and they were marked as Exs. C1 to C5. Oral and documentary evidence have been adduced on either side and the Commissioner also was examined as Court witness.

3. The learned trial Judge was of the view that the plaintiff’ s documents particularly Ex.A1 and A2 do not relate to the property actually in dispute and he has not shown