JUDGMENT :

Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of C.P.C, against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.11 of 1992 on the file of the Sub Court, Ambasamudram dated 21.12.1999 reversing the judgment and decree in O.S.No. 366 of 1978 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Ambasamudram dated 12.03.1986.

1. The plaintiff is the appellant.

2. The plaintiff filed O.S.No.366 of 1978 before the Principal District Munsif Court, Ambasamudram for declaration of title and permanent injunction over the second item of the suit schedule property. The suit was decreed in entirety by the trial Court. The defendant filed A.S.No.11 of 1992 before the Sub Court, Ambasamudram. The learned Subordinate Judge confirmed the judgment and decree of the trial Court with regard to the first item, but reversed the judgment and decree of the trial Court with regard to the second item of the suit schedule properties. As against the same, the plaintiff has filed the present second appeal.

3. The contention of the plaintiff as regards the second schedule property is as follows:

4. The plaintiff's husband Sorimuthu Pillai had passed away on 20.07.1941. At that point of time, the plaintiff's son Nallasivam Pillai was aged about five years and the plaintiff's daughter Ramalakshmi was just 1 ½ years old. Since the plaintiff was without any support, her father Azhagusundaram Pillai had brought her to his native town Sivanthipurm Village. The second schedule property site was owned by the father of the plaintiff. He had gifted the said site in favour of the plaintiff in the year 1963 and possession was also handed over to her. The plaintiff put up construction at the cost of Rs.2000/- in the second schedule property in the year 1964. The plaintiff utilized the income from the first schedule property and also the sale proceeds of the house property located at Cheranmahadevi Village. The plaintiff's son Nallasivam Pillai had not contributed for the construction of the house property. Her son Nallasivam Pillai does not have any title or any interest over the second schedule property. The plaintiff is residing in the second schedule property for more than the statutory period and she has acquired title by adverse possession. The plaintiff had further contended that the defendant is the wife of her son Nallasivam Pillai. She had initiated O.S.No.152 of 1975 before the Sub Court, Tirunelveli and obtained a decree for maintenance. In the suit, a charge decree has been created over the first and second schedule properties in the present suit. The defendant has filed E.P.No.20 of 1978 in the maintenance suit to bring the properties for Court auction for non-payment of the maintenance amount. According to the plaintiff, since the first and second schedule properties belong to the plaintiff, the defendant is not entitled to bring those properties for Court auction in E.P.No.20 of 1978. Since a charge decree alone has been passed in O.S.No.152 of 1975, the plaintiff is not in a position to file any claim petition in the said suit. Hence, the present suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction.

5. The defendant filed a written statement contending that the plaintiff in collusion with her son Nallasivam Pillai (husband of the defendant) had filed this present suit only to prevent the defendant from enjoying the fruits of the decree in O.S.No.152 of 1975. She further contended that the plaintiff has given up her rights in the first schedule property in favour of her son Nallasivam Pillai and hence, the said Nallasivam Pillai is the absolute owner of the first schedule property. She further contended that the site of the second schedule property is owned by Thiruvaduthurai Adheenam and the same was given in favour of the Nallasivam Pillai. The said Nallasivam Pillai only was paying the rent to Thiruvaduthurai Adheenam. According to the defendant, her husband namely Nallasivam Pillai has put up construction in the second schedule property out of his own fun