K.B.K. Vasuki, J.

1. The second plaintiff in the suit in O.S. No. 322/1977 filed the present second appeal against the reversing judgment made in AS. 97/1991. The suit was originally filed by Nallaya Nadar against the first respondent Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board for declaring that the plaintiff perfected title by adverse possession of the suit property and for granting injunction restraining the first defendant in any manner interfering with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The claim made in the suit is that the plaintiff came to be in the occupation of the suit property as early as in 1957 and he had been in possession and enjoyment of the same by putting up zinc sheet shed and bamboo stick fencing to an extent of 600 sq.ft. and by using the remaining extent for storing firewood, charcoal etc. and after duly obtaining requisite licence from the Corporation of Chennai for running the charcoal and firewood business, he has been in such possession and enjoyment of the property openly, notoriously and adverse to the knowledge of all and in his own right for more than the statutory period and thus perfected title by adverse possession to all including that of the owner. The cause of action for filing the suit arose on his being served with Ex. A22 notice dated 11.11.1976 by the first respondent Tamil Nadu Slum clearance Board, calling upon him to remove the superstructure put up by him in the suit property. According to the plaintiff, the first defendant has no right to interfere with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property and the plaintiff is not bound to surrender vacant possession as demanded under Ex. A22 notice.

2. The first defendant Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board in their written statement and additional written statement filed by them stated that the suit property forming part of large extent in Mosque street originally belonged to one C.A. Khaja Mohideen Sahib, who gave his consent to acquire the land for constructing tenements for the slum people and also authorised the Slum Board authorities to enter into the land to proceed with the construction work. The said area was declared as slum area by way of notification dated 12.4.1972 under section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1971 (hereinafter shortly referred to as Act) and a Scheme called "Mosque Street Slum Clearance Scheme" was formulated in the area and the Slum Board also approved the proposal to construct 112 numbers of multi storeyed tenements with the financial assistance of HUDCO by G.O.Ms. No. 54 dated 05.02.1977 and the plaintiff was given Rs. 50/- as ex-gratia payment for temporary rehabilitation for removing his hut. When the construction work was about to commence, the suit came to be filed by the plaintiff without any right to do so. It is further contended therein that the plaintiff made a request to the Slum Board to permit him to run the Fire Wood Shop Depot in the same place and the same was rejected on 4.9.1976. Subsequently, a warning notice was issued to the plaintiff to remove the superstructure and the same was followed by another notice to all interested persons including that of the plaintiff, with liberty given to him to appear in person or to represent by any pleader and adduce oral and documentary evidence and make objection, if any and on their failure to respond to the same, the enquiry was completed and the same was intimated to the concerned authority. Thereafter, further proceedings was initiated by issuing draft notification under section17(1) of the Act for declaring the same as slum clearance area. It is also contended therein that the plaintiff can make no claim without challenging the notification under section 3(1) and he estopped from making such claim by reason of his receipt of ex gratia payment of Rs. 50/- and the suit is also not maintainable in view of the act ion initiated by the prescribed authority.

3. During the pendency of t