JUDGMENT :

G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.

1. The appellant herein is the first defendant. Aggrieved by the reversing judgment of the 1st Appellate Court, the present second appeal is filed.

2. The 1st respondent herein who laid the suit before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Arcot, sought for perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property alleging that the defendants are interfering his peaceful possession of the suit property. The plaintiff traced his title over the suit property, relying upon the sale-deed dated 14.02.1965 executed in favour of Subramania Mudaliar and the settlement deed dated 12.10.1980 executed by Subramania Mudaliar in favour of the plaintiff. The defendants contested the suit on the ground that the properly described in the documents relied by the plaintiff and the suit property for which injunction sought are not one and the same. The case of the defendant was that the plaintiff is enjoying his portion of the property fortified with compound wall. Whereas the land adjacent to the plaintiff compound belongs to the defendants. The well situated in that portion of the land was filled with soil and the land to an extend of 12 cents being enjoyed by