Boundaries will prevail over extent, and the anterior title deed will prevail over subsequent title deeds in property disputes.

This second appeal is focussed by the original plaintiffs, animadverting upon the judgement and decree dated 24.01.2008 passed in A.S.No.112 of 2007 by the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Salem, in reversing the judgment and decree of the trial Court, namely, Principal District Munsif Court, Salem, in O.S.No.289 of 2005. For convenience sake, the parties are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court.

2. Heard both sides.

3. A summation and summarisation of the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this Second Appeal would run thus:

(i) The plaintiffs filed the suit seeking declaration and injunction in respect of the property situated in S.No.23/3 including a well therein. The defendant filed the written statement and contested the suit, whereupon issues were framed.

(ii) During trial, the first plaintiff/A.Chandran examined himself as P.W.1 along with P.W.2/Azhagesan and Exs.A1 to A6 were marked. The defendant/Periyammal examined herself as D.W.1 on her side along with D.W.2/Marimuthu and D.W.3/Dhanalakshmi and Exs.B1 to B11 were marked.

4. Ultimately, the trial Court decreed the suit. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the same, the defendant preferred appeal, whereupon the lower appellate Court on merits, set aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court and dismissed the original suit.

5. Challenging and impugning the judgment of the appellate Court, the Second Appeal was filed by the plaintiffs on various grounds, the gist and kernel of them would run thus:

The lower appellate Court failed to take into account the purport of Exs.A1 and A2 vis-a-vis Ex.B2. The oral evidence of D.W.1 also was not considered by the appellate Court but it simply upset the reasoned judgment of the trial Court.

6. My learned Predecessor framed the following substantial questions of law:

"1. Whether the Lower Appellate Court was right in law in ignoring the documentary evidence (Exs.A1 and A2) relating to Suit property and also came to the conclusion by misreading the Ex.B2 that the Respondent is having title over the well?

2. Have not the Lower Appellate Court committed an error in non-suiting the Plaintiff by discarding the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 and without appreciating the documents Ex.A1 and A2?"

7. After hearing both sides, I thought fit to frame the following additional substantial questions of law also, as per proviso to Section 100 of CPC and both sides took notice of it and submitted their further arguments also.

"3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of this case, the description of the boundaries in Ex.B2 will prevail over the extent? and whether the antecedent title deed would have priority over the subsequently emerged sale deeds, Exs.A1 and A2 executed by the same vendor who executed Ex.B2?"

8. Tersely and briefly, the arguments as put forth and set forth on the side of the learned counsel for the appellants in Second Appeal/plaintiffs would run thus:

(a) Malayoora Gounder purchased the property measuring an extent of 1.68 acres of land in S.No.23/3. Subsequently, he sold as per sale deed Ex.B2 dated 20.03.2002, an extent of 80 cents on the western portion of the entire 1.68 acres in favour of the defendant. Subsequently as per Ex.A1, the sale deed dated 24.06.2002 an extent of 43 cents of land plus one cent of land which allegedly included a half portion of the well was sold by Malayoora Gounder in favour of the first plaintiff. On the same day, the same Malayoora Gounder sold in favour of the second plaintiff another extent of 43 cents of land plus one cent of land which allegedly included the remaining half portion of the well.

(b) Simply because in the earlier sale deed Ex.B2, there is no reference to the remaining property of the Malayoora Gounder situated to the south of the property sold under Ex.B2 in favour of the defendant, it cannot be contended that the said Malayoora Gounder lost his right ove