JUDGMENT :

(Prayer in S.A.No.496 of 2021: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Judgment and Decree dated 26.08.2019 in A.S.No.154 of 2018 on the file of the learned II Additional District Judge, Erode, confirming the Judgment and decree dated 12.06.2018 in O.S.No.42 of 2007 on the file of the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode.

S.A.No.497 of 2021: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Judgment and Decree dated 26.08.2019 in A.S.No.155 of 2018 on the file of the learned II Additional District Judge, Erode, confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 12.06.2018 in O.S.No.17 of 2007 on the file of the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode.)

1. Since the content of the Plaints and the Written Statements are Common in both the Second Appeals a Common Judgment is being pronounced in S.A.Nos.496 and 497 of 2021.

2. S.A.No.496 of 2021 arises against the Judgment and Decree of the learned II Additional District Judge, Erode, in A.S.No.154 of 2018 confirming the Judgment and Decree passed by the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode in O.S.No.42 of 2007.

3. S.A.No.497 of 2021 arises against the Judgment and Decree of the learned II Additional District Judge, Erode, in A.S.No.155 of 2018 confirming the Judgment and Decree passed by the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode in O.S.No.17 of 2007.

4. The parties are being referred to by their names for ease of understanding the facts of the case.

Plaintiff’s case in both the suits:

5. G.K.Muthammal, the 1st defendant in both the suits had three sons, namely, N. Kalidass, N. Sivakumar (the plaintiff in O.S.No.17 of 2007) and N. Venkatesh (the father of the plaintiffs in O.S.No.42 of 2007). The two suits have been filed for declaring that the plaintiffs in their respective suits i.e., N. Sivakumar as regards O.S.No.17 of 2007 and Sachin Sandeep and Nithin Akhilesh (the plaintiffs in O.S.No.42 of 2007) are the absolute owners of the property described in the respective suit schedule as per the two Settlement Deeds dated 10.10.2003 irrespective of the Deed of cancellation of settlement dated 22.06.2005 and the Sale Deed dated 11.05.2006 by the 1st defendant in favour of the 2nd defendant and for a permanent injunction.

6. The properties bearing old Door Nos.883 to 889 now Door No.264, Kamaraj Street, Brough Road, Erode, belonged to G.K.Muthammal. G.K.Muthammal was desirous of giving portions of the said property to her three sons. This property was originally her residence and thereafter, she had constructed a new house in E.V.N. Road and shifted there with the family. The suit property was leased out to the tenants and it was altered to accommodate four tenants. G.K.Muthammal was desirous of giving three East facing shops in the ground floor and three in the first floor in favour of her sons. With this intent, she had originally executed a Will dated 01.03.1999 bequeathing a portion of the property to S.Vinod Shivakumar and S. Sudhir Krishnan, who are the sons of N.Sivakumar. G.K.Muthammal executed a registered Settlement Deed in favour of N.Kalidass and she had executed a Will on the same day in favour of the plaintiffs in O.S.No.42 of 2007. Subsequently, G.K.Muthammal executed two Settlement Deeds both dated 10.10.2003, one in favour of N.Sivakumar and another in favour of minors Sachin Sandeep and Nithin Akhilesh, the children of her youngest son N.Venkatesh. She had appointed her daughter-in-law, Indu Priya, the wife of Venkatesh as the Guardian of the minor. The Northern portion of the property had been given to N.Kalidass, the middle portion to N.Sivakumar and the Southern portion to the sons of Venkatesh. After the execution of the Settlement Deed, the said G.K.Muthammal had handed over the original Settlement Deed to N. Sivakumar and the mother of the plaintiffs in O.S.No.42 of 2007.

7. N.Sivakumar and the plaintiffs in O.S.No.42 of 2007 would submit that on the execution of