1. The present second appeal has been directed against the impugned judgment and decree passed by the learned II Additional District Judge, Tindivanam in A.S.No.18 of 2012 dated 17.1.2013, in and by which the judgment and decree passed by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Tindivanam in O.S.No.14 of 2009 dated 20.9.2011, dismissing the suit filed by the respondent herein, were reversed.

2. At the outset, it may be mentioned that when the present second appeal was filed challenging the impugned judgment and decree of the first appellate Court decreeing the suit for recovery of money, the appellant/defendant has taken different grounds, namely, whether the permissive possession could be construed as an exclusive possession of the respondents especially when the title over the suit property was not proved by the respondent; whether the possession in part of the suit property is construed as the possession of the entire suit properties; whether the respondents could claim adverse possession against the appellants especially when they claimed title over the suit properties; whether the permissive occupants is entitled for injunction against the true owners especially when t