This second appeal arises out of a suit being O.S.No.180 of 2004 on the file of 'District Munsif Court, Shencottai' (hereinafter referred to as 'trial court' for brevity). One R.Thangam, sole defendant in the trial court is the appellant before this Court in the instant second appeal. One P.T. Ram Mohan, sole plaintiff before the trial court in the aforesaid suit, is respondent No.1 before this Court in the instant second appeal.

2. 20 cents or thereabouts of land together with Coconut trees thereon comprised in S.No.438/4 in Puliarai village in Shencottai Taluk in Thoothukudi District is the subject matter of the instant second appeal and the same shall hereinafter be referred to as 'suit property'. To be noted, schedule in the plaint in the trial court and the decree in the trial court describe extent of suit property as 30 cents of land, but both sides before this court agree without any disagreement that the extent of suit property is only 20 cents or thereabouts.

3. Pending second appeal, plaintiff in the trial court who was originally sole respondent in the instant second appeal, sold the suit property to and in favour of one A.Muthiah Moopanar in and by a registered sale deed dated 20.09.2013, registered as document No. 1436/2013 on the file of the Sub Registrar Office, Shencottai. Owing to such sale, the vendee Muthiah Moopanar was impleaded as respondent No.2 in this second appeal.

4. Plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit in the trial court with prayers for declaration of title and consequential permanent injunction qua possession of suit property. There are two more limbs of prayers and one is the usual residuary limb and the other limb is prayer for costs.

5. In the plaint, it has, inter-alia, been averred by the plaintiff that the suit property was originally plaintiff's ancestral property and that the plaintiff got the suit property in and under a partition deed dated 8.3.1961 (Ex.A.1). Plaintiff's father, plaintiff's brothers and plaintiff are parties to the partition deed. It is the further case of the plaintiff that on 08.12.1994, plaintiff sold an extent of 2 acres and 28 cents of lands to defendant being lands comprised in S.Nos.438/1 and 438/6 also in Puliarai village, Shencottai Taluk, Thoothukudi District. Further, the suit was predicated primarily on the ground that the defendant is interfering with plaintiff's possession of suit property and is also making some claims qua suit property.

6. Defendant entered appearance, filed a written statement in November, 2004 and completed pleadings. The pivotal point of defence for the defendant is contained in paragraph 6 of the written statement. That pivotal point is to the effect that defendant purchased the aforesaid 2 acres and 28 cents of lands under the aforesaid Ex.A.2 dated 08.12.1994 from the plaintiff and that defendant is in possession and enjoyment of the land conveyed under Ex.A.2 from the date of purchase. In other words, it is the case of the defendant that the suit property was also conveyed by plaintiff under Ex.A.2. It is the case of the defendant that the plaintiff, in an attempt to dislodge the defendant from the suit property, has launched the suit. Parties went to trial.

7. On the side of plaintiff, plaintiff examined himself as P.W.1 and one Vellapandi, the jurisdictional Village Administrative Officer, was examined as P.W.2. Eight documents, i.e., Exs.A.1 to A.8 were marked on the side of plaintiff. On defendant's side, defendant's father-in-law was examined as the lone defendant's side witness, i.e., D.W.1. On the side of defendant, one document was marked as Ex.B.1. In the trial, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed. This Advocate Commissioner had filed a report, sketch and surveyor sketch. All these are dated 09.12.2004 and they were marked as court exhibits. Besides this, four documents were also assigned exhibit numbers and marked as Exs.X.1 to X.4. Five issues were framed. The issues centred around questions as to whether the suit p