1.

1. In a suit for injunction, based on possession, where the title itself is disputed, whether it is mandatory to include the relief of declaration of title, at all circumstances or declaration should be sought for only under certain specified circumstances?

2. Whether the executant of the document himself can challenge the validity of the document and if so, on what grounds?

3. When a document is challenged as a sham and nominal document, whether it is necessary to seek the remedy of setting aside the document?

- are the main issues raised in the second appeal.

2. The defendant is the appellant. Kosalai Ammal and one Balayya were the plaintiffs, who are the first and second respondents in this second appeal. On the death of Kosalai Ammal, Rajan and P. Thangamuthu have been impleaded as respondents 3 and 4, as legal representatives of the deceased first respondent.

3. The plaintiffs filed the suit for injunction before the learned District Munsif, Jayamkondan, in O.S. No. 301 of 1996. The suit was dismissed, vide judgment dated 31.07.1997. Challenging the dismissal, the plaintiffs filed the appeal in A.S. No. 44 of 1997. By judgment and decree dated 15.04.2004, the appeal was a