Proper documentation and evidence are crucial in property ownership and adverse possession claims.

T. RAVINDRAN, J.

1. Challenge in this second appeal is made to the judgment and decree dated 21.12.2000 made in A.S. No. 43 of 1998 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Virudhachalam, reversing the judgment and decree dated 21.10.1998 made in O.S. No. 679/1988 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Virudhachalam.

2. Parties are referred to as per their rankings in the trial Court.

3. Suit for declaration, Permanent injunction or in the alternative for possession.

4. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, is that the suit property was acquired by the plaintiff from Thangavel Padayachi by way of a registered sale deed dated 19.12.1963 and from the date of the sale, the plaintiff has been in possession and enjoyment of the suit property by paying kist etc. and also obtaining patta and thus, according to the plaintiff, he is the absolute owner of the suit property and also prescribed his title to the suit property by way of adverse possession on account of the continuous enjoyment. The defendant has lands to the North and East of the suit property and on account of the same, the defendant had been requesting the plaintiff to sell the suit property and the plaintiff, however, did not accede to the request of the defendant and due to the same, the defendant, without any legal authority, started interfering with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the suit property and hence, according to the plaintiff, he has been necessitated to lay the suit for appropriate reliefs.

5. The case of the defendant, in brief, is that the suit is not maintainable either in law or on facts. The allegation that the defendant, on the refusal of the plaintiff to sell the suit property, started interfering with his possession and enjoyment of the suit property illegally is false and it is also false to state that the plaintiff has title to the suit property and that, he is in possession and enjoyment of the same as absolute owner. The plaintiff is not in possession and enjoyment of the suit property as claimed in the plaint and the defendant owns lands to the North and East of the suit property and the plaintiff received a sum of Rs. 400/- from the defendant on 02.01.1968 and on the same date, handed over the possession of the suit property to the defendant and from that date onwards, it is only the defendant, who is in possession and enjoyment of the suit property by paying kist, erecting bore and oil engine and enjoying the suit property by raising a thatched shed and obtaining patta, etc. and the same could also be seen from the report and plan of the advocate commissioner and the defendant, by also on account of his long and continuous possession and enjoyment of the suit property, had perfected his title to the suit property by way of adverse possession and hence, the plaintiff has laid the suit without any cause of action and the suit, therefore, is liable to be dismissed.

6. In support of the plaintiff's case, PW-1 has been examined and Exs.A1 to 14 were marked. On the side of the defendant's DW-1 was examined and Exs.B1 to B34 were marked. Exs.C1 to C3 were also marked.

7. On a consideration of the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the respective parties and the submissions made, the trial Court was pleased to dismiss the suit. On appeal by the plaintiff, the first appellate Court, on an appreciation of the materials placed on record, was pleased to set aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court and by allowing the appeal preferred by the plaintiff, decreed the suit as prayed for in favour of the plaintiff. Aggrieved over the same, the present second appeal has been preferred.

8. At the time of admission of the second appeal, the following substantial questions of law were formulated for consideration:

“(i) Whether the lower Appellate Court erred in law in reversing the well considered judgment and decree of the trial Court without appreciating the evidence of the appellant in a proper and perspective manne