Raghavan, J.-The above two Second Appeals are referred by Ismail, J. in view of the conflicting decisions of this Court on the admissibility of boundary recitals. in documents not inter partes. In order to appreciate the reference, it is necessary to set out briefly the facts.

2. Defendants 1 and 2 are appellants in S.A.No.1157 of 1963 and the 5th defendant is the appellant in S.A.No. 19 of 1964. Both second appeals arise out of O.S. No. 530 of 1960 on the file of the District Munsiff’s Court,Tiruvarmamalai. The plaintiff instituted the suit for declaration of his title to the suit site in the village of Kalasapakkam and for possession. The plaintiff’s case is that the suit site originally belonged to one Periathambi Chetti, the father-in-law of the 3rd defendant Muniammal and the great grandfather of the 4th defendant minor Kasi Chetti. The said Periathambi was in possession and enjoyment of the site by installing a country oil mill thereon. While so, certain enemies of his complained to the Government that he had encroached on the Government land, and that he should be evicted. Periathambi contended that the property in question had been in his possession for over 30 years and acc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document