S.S. SUNDAR, J.

1. The defendants 1, 2, 4 in the suit in O.S. No. 190 of 2002 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Tenkasi, are the appellants in this appeal.

2. The respondents 1 and 2 in this appeal filed a suit in O.S. No. 190 of 2002 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Tenkasi, for declaration of title and consequential relief of recovery of possession and also to direct the defendants to remove the unlawful constructions put up by them in the suit property. The suit property is an extent of 9075 sq. ft. in Survey No. 748/5 in Chokkampatti Village within the jurisdiction of Kadayanallur Sub Registrar, Tirunelveli District.

2.1 The case of the plaintiff in the suit is that the suit property originally belonged to one Valangapulithevar, Kotturathevar and Samy Ayya Thevar and that they sold the property to the mother of plaintiffs one Vellaiyathal by a sale deed dated 01.01.1941 and that the said Vellaiyathal died about 20 years back leaving behind the plaintiffs as her legal representatives.

3. It is further stated in the plaint that though the plaintiffs are living away from the suit village, they are in enjoyment of the property through one Veliamba Thevar by tethering cattle, dumping waste and by keeping haystack. It is also the case of the plaintiffs that defendants 1 and 2 made an attempt to construct a public toilet through the third defendant and that the plaintiffs prevented them from doing so and gave a police complaint. However, it is admitted that the police did not take action as the suit property has been classified as a Government poramboke land. It is also the case of the plaintiffs that the suit property originally belonged to Chokkampatti Jamin and that during survey, the suit property was wrongly classified as poramboke and that the said classification is not binding on the plaintiffs. It is also alleged in the plaint that the defendants 1 to 3 put up construction with the assistance of police and that therefore, the constructions are illegal. Since the defendants have indulged in encroachment, it is stated in the plaint that the plaintiffs were constrained to file the suit.

4. The first defendant in the suit is the Chokkampatti Panchayat through its President. The second defendant is the Kadayanallur Panchayat Union through its Commissioner and the third defendant is the Contractor who was awarded the contract for construction of public toilet by the first defendant. The fourth defendant is the State represented by the District Collector, Tirunelveli. The suit was contested mainly by the local body namely the Chokkampatti panchayat. The case of the plaintiff in the plaint was totally denied by the first defendant in the written statement. It is the specific case of the first defendant that the suit property is a Government poramboke and classified as in the year 1960 and hence, vested with the first defendant, pursuant to the settlement proceedings long back. It is also stated by the first defendant that the classification of the land as per the Settlement Register exists for a long period and that on ground, the suit property exists only as a cart track poramboke (public thoroughfare). It is the case of the first defendant that the panchayat union in their meeting decided to allot a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- for the purpose of constructing a sanitary complex for women in the suit property. It is the further case of the first defendant that a tender was invited and contract was awarded to the third defendant in the suit to put up sanitary complex for women for the benefit and use of women in the village. Since the women in Chokkampatti Village were suffering a lot and were using lands located either side of National Highways as the place for toilet, the first defendant executed the work by constructing the sanitary complex as planned. Since the complex was constructed for the benefit of public, the present suit has been filed by the plaintiffs with ulterior motive. It is als