JUDGMENT :

This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Sub Judge, Gobichettipalayam, in A.S.No.5 of 2017 confirming the judgment of the learned District Munsif, Gobichettipalayam in O.S.No.248 of 2010.

2. It is the case of the appellant that appellant/plaintiff filed the suit for the relief of permanent injunction restraining the respondent from interfering with the appellant's use of suit property as taxi stand till the respondent allots a specified place. Appellant was registered as Society No.14/1999 on 15.03.1999. There are 90 members in the society and taxi owners and taxi drivers are the members of this society. Appellant's society is functioning outside Gobichettipalayam town bus stand near Urban Bank building. They put up a shed and parking their cars. That place belongs to respondent's Municipality. Originally, they put up thatched hut. When Mr.Ansul Mishra, the Sub Collector, Gobichettipalayam, came for inspection, he instructed the change of shed as iron shed to avoid fire accident. For the past over 45 years, the appellant is using the place in and around Gobichettipalayam town bus stand as a parking place (i.e taxi stand) for parking their taxis. They provided 36 chairs to the use of the public, donated Rs.5100/- during Kargil War, donated Rs.5000/- to Gobichettipalayam Municipality Middle School Parents Teachers Association. They are engaged in social service activities. At the instance of some persons, respondent's officials threatened the appellant to vacate the taxi stand within two days from 16.07.2010. On the South and east of Gobichettipalayam town bus stand, there situate SDN colony. It a lay out area and recognized in ROC.No.5979/67C3 dated 21.06.1968. However, residential area is being converted as commercial area contrary to the rules. There is a road on the South of Urban Bank building. Some persons have encroached this road and built hotel. Respondent is not taking any action against those violators.

However, respondent is trying to disturb appellant's enjoyment of the suit property as their taxi stand. Therefore, the suit for the aforesaid reliefs.

3. Respondent filed written statement denying the allegations made in the plaint. It is the case of the respondent that the claim of the appellant that the appellant has been using the place on the east of Gobichettipalayam bus stand for parking taxis for 45 years is not true. The bus stand was constructed only before twenty years. Roughly two hundred buses have ingress and egress through the road in which the appellant claims that they have their taxi stand. Because of the parking of taxis, public are put to severe hardship. Many accidents had happened and many suffered injuries. Public had been complaining about the taxi stand. Despite warning given not to park the taxis, appellant's society does not pay heed to the advice. Suddenly, appellant put up iron pillars and shed made of iron sheet much to the annoyance and disturbance of the public. When the respondent demanded the appellant to remove the shed, they promised to remove it, but filed the suit on false allegations. On 20.07.2010, the Municipality officials have removed the shed with the help of Police. Appellant has no right to use the suit property as taxi stand. Therefore, the suit is liable to be dismissed.

4. On the basis of the above pleading, the Trial Court framed the following issues:

(i) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of permanent injunction prayed for?

(ii) What relief, if any, plaintiff is entitled?

5. During trial, PW1 and PW2 were examined. Exhibit A1 to A47 were marked on the side of the plaintiff. DW1 and DW2 were examined and Exhibit B1 to B4 were marked. That apart, Commissioner's report and plan were marked as Exhibit C1 and C2.

6. On considering the oral and documentary evidence, Trial Court found that appellant's claim that it has been using the suit property as taxi stand for over 45 years is not proved and the appellant has not made out any le