Back
2009 Supreme(Mad) 2872
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
Natarajan
Versus
Sengamala Moopanar
Second Appeal No.595 of 2000 and M.P.No.2599 of 2007
Decided on: 04-08-2009
For the Appellant:J.R.K. Bhavanantham, K. Sridhar, Advocates.
For the Respondent:S. Parthasarathy, Senior Counsel, M/s. Sarvabhavna Associates, Advocates.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on documentary evidence, presumption, and estoppel to determine ownership and possession of properties in a civil dispute.
Headnote:
Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Section 100 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Code of Civil Procedure, Section 100 - The court discussed the evidentiary value of exhibits, the presumption of continuance retrospectively, estoppel, and comparison of signatures in the sale deed. The court also referred to the Indian Limitation Act and the Indian Evidence Act to establish the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the suit properties.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and injunction claiming absolute ownership and possession of suit properties. The defendant contested the claim, alleging an oral exchange of properties and challenging the plaintiff's possession.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the plaintiff had absolute right over certain properties and was in possession and enjoyment of the same. The defendant's claims of oral exchange and possession were not substantiated. The court also addressed substantial questions of law related to evidentiary value, presumption, and estoppel.
Issues: The issues involved the plaintiff's ownership and possession of the suit properties, the defendant's claim of oral exchange, and the evidentiary value of exhibits and documents.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the plaintiff's documentary evidence to establish ownership and possession, while rejecting the defendant's claims of oral exchange and possession. The court also applied principles of evidentiary value, presumption, and estoppel to reach its decision.
Final Decision: The second appeal was dismissed, upholding the concurrent findings of the courts below in favor of the plaintiff.
1. Second appeal filed under section 100 of the code of civil procedure judgment and decree dated 31.03.1999 made in a.s.no.75 of 1993 on the file of the learned subordinate judge, ariyalur against the judgment and the decree in o.s.no.273 of 1991 dated 21. 1993 on the file of the learned district munsif, ariyalur.
The above second appeal arises against the judgment and decree in a.s.no.75 of 1993 on the file of learned subordinate judge, ariyalur against the judgment and decree in o.s.no.273 of 1991 on the file of the learned district munsif, ariyalur.
2. The defendant in the suit is the appellant in the above second appeal. The respondent herein is the plaintiff in the suit.
3. The plaintiff filed the suit in o.s.no.273 of 1991 on the file of the learned district munsif, ariyalur for declaration and injunction.
4. The brief case of the plaintiff is as follows:-
(i) according to the plaintiff, the 4 items of suit properties belongs to him absolutely. The patta nos.403 and 374 pertaining to the suit properties stands in the name of the plaintiff. Originally, item 1 and 2 of the suit property belonged to one palaniyammal w/o swamynatha moopanar. On 15. 1962, the said palaniyammal sold item 1 and 2 of the suit properties to one muthusamy moopanar. The said muthusamy moopanar, his brothers son kathirvel moopanar and his brother karuppaiah moopanar sold item 1 and 2 measuring an extent of 21 cents in s.f. 191/3 and 25 cents in s.f. 191/5 to the plaintiff on 15. 1970. The plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the properties from the date of purchase.
(ii) item 3 and 4 of the suit properties originally belonged to vadivel moopanar. On 8. 1932, the said vadivel moopanar mortgaged the properties with one paramasiva moopanar for a sum of rs.22/-. Since, the said vadivel moopanar could not discharge the mortgaged debt, he orally sold items 3 and 4 of the suit properties to the father of the plaintiff namely kandasamy moopanar for a sum of rs.50/-. The said kandasamy moopanar died in the year 1960. The plaintiff is the only son of the said kandasamy moopanar. The plaintiff and his father were in possession and enjoyment of the item 3 and 4 of the suit properties from january 1936. The plaintiffs father discharged the mortgaged debt with paramasiva moopanar and paid the balancaae sale consideration to vadivel moopanar on 30.1.1936. An endorsement of discharge of the mortgage debt was made in the mortgage deed dated 8. 1932.
(iii) the defendant have no right over the suit properties. The defendants purchase under sale deed dated 24. 1991 and 9. 91 are not valid. The documents are fictitious documents. The vendor of the defendant have no right over the suit properties. The plaintiff issued notice on 19. 1991 and the defendant sent reply on 29. 1991, denying the title and enjoyment of the suit properties. The plaintiff also pleaded adverse possession and prescription. Therefore, the plaintiff filed a suit.
5. The brief case of the defendant is as follows:
(i) according to the defendant, the plaintiff was in possession of suit item 1 and 2 till 9. 1980. In the year 1980, there was an oral exchange between the plaintiff and dhanavel whereby, the said dhanavel gave suit item 3 and 4 to the plaintiff in exchange to item 1 and 2 of the suit properties which were given by the plaintiff to dhanavel. The possession followed in favour of the parties as part of the exchange. The above exchange was resorted by both for the convenient enjoyment of both parties as s.f. 191/1 and 191/7 were owned by the plaintiff and as these items are contiguous ones for suit items 3 and 4 and suit items 1 and 2 are also contiguous ones.
(ii) according to the defendant, oral exchange is amply proved by the registered sale deed dated 25. 1975 executed by the one ayyammal in favour of dhanavel moopanar in respect of item 3 and 4 of the suit properties. The plaintiffs father kandasamy moopanar did not purchase the suit items 3 and 4 orally from vadivel moopana
