JUDGMENT :

The original defendants 1 and 2 are the appellants herein.

2. Pending second appeal, one Rajarajeswari purchased the property and filed C.M.P.No.868/2012 and it was allowed on 28.09.2012 and she was impleaded as third appellant. Originally, one Muthammal (now late) mother of the third respondent herein filed O.S.No.130/1982 before the Principal District Munsif Court, Bhavani against the original defendants praying for the relief of bare injunction. The suit was decreed on 30.04.1998.

3. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree, the defendants 1 and 2 filed A.S.No.82/1988 before the Sub Court, Bhavani and the same was dismissed on 30.03.2000. Hence, the original defendants 1 and 2 filed the above second appeal 966/2000. As stated supra, the third defendant is subsequent purchaser.

4. At the time of admission, the following substantial questions of law were framed :-

1. Whether the suit in O.S.No.130/82 filed by Muthammal is premature one since she got right over the suit property only subsequent to the suit as per compromise decree in A.S.No.126/82.

2. Whether the Courts below are correct in holding that the fourth defendant is entitled to enter into compromise colluding with the p