S. Nagamuthu, J.

1. The suit in O.S. No. 808 of 1996 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Poonamallee was filed by one Mrs. N. Valliammal. There are 11 defendants in the suit. The second defendant is no more and in his place, his legal representatives have been added as parties. It was a suit filed by Mrs. N. Valliammal for declaration of title and for permanent injunction against the defendants therein from in any manner interfering with her peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. During the pendency of the said suit in O.S. No. 808 of 1996, a suit in O.S. No. 202 of 2009 was filed by one Mr. Suvindar Singh against Mrs. N. Valliammal and his son Mr. Nagalingam. The said suit was filed for permanent injunction to restrain the defendants therein from in any manner interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property described therein.

2. Similarly, during the pendency of the suit in O.S. No. 808 of 1996, a suit in O.S. No. 204 of 2009 was filed by one Mr. Kannaiah, against Mrs. N. Valliammal and his son Mr. Nagalingam. This suit was filed for permanent injunction to restrain the defendants therein from in any manner interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property described therein.

3. On a request made by the parties to the said three suits, joint trial was held by the learned Principal District Munsif, Poona-mallee and common evidence was recorded in O.S. No. 808 of 1996. Mrs. N. Valliammal, the sole plaintiff in O.S. No. 808 of 1996 and the first defendant in O.S. Nos. 202 and 204 of 2009 died even before conclusion of the trial of these three suits. But, the same was not reported to the learned Principal District Munsif, Poonamallee. After the death of Mrs. N. Valliammal, the trial was concluded and all the three cases were reserved for judgment and finally, by a common judgment dated 14.10.2014, the trial Court dismissed the suit in O.S. No. 808 of 1996 and decreed the suits in O.S. Nos. 202 & 204 of 2009 as prayed for.

4. As against the said common judgment and decrees passed, Mr. Nagalingam filed three different appeals. A.S. No. 96 of 2014 was filed against the decree in O.S. No. 808 of 1996; A.S. No. 97 of 2014 was filed against the decree in O.S. No. 202 of 2009 and A.S. No. 98 of 2014 was filed against the decree in O.S. No. 204 of 2009. The learned Subordinate Judge, Poonamallee by a common judgment dated 01.04.2015, dismissed all the three appeals. As against the dismissal of A.S. No. 96 of 2014, Mr. Nagalingam has come up with S.A. No. 1041 of 2015; as against the dismissal of A.S. No. 97 of 2014, Mr. Nagalingam has come up with S.A. No. 1042 of 2015 and as against the dismissal of A.S. No. 98 of 2014, Mr. Nagalingam has come up with S.A. No. 1040 of 2015. That is how all these three second appeals are before this Court for admission.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant in all the three appeals and I have also perused the records carefully.

6. The case of the appellant/Mr. Nagalingam, in common, in all the three second appeals is as follows:-

"The suit property in O.S. No. 808 of 1996 is comprised in S. No. 45/2 of No. 102, Ramapuram Village, Saidapet Taluk, Chengalpet MGR District. According to the appellant, his mother, Mrs. N. Valliammal had purchased 68 cents each under Exs. A.1 and A.2 in the year 1966 and 1968 respectively. Thus, the total extent of the land purchased on these two sale deeds was 1 acre 36 cents. From the date of purchase, Mrs. N. Valliammal was in possession and enjoyment of the entire extent of 1 acre 36 cents, as absolute owner. While so, on 27.09.1983, Mrs. N. Valliammal along with his sons including the appellant herein Mr. Nagalingam, had executed a general power of attorney in favour of one Mr. S. Dhanu Murthy thereby empowering him to sell the property measuring 1 acre 21 cents comprised in S. No. 45/2 in Ramapuram, Saidapet Taluk, Chengalpet MGR District. In the deed of power of at