The sufficiency of evidence to support a finding of fact is a matter for the decision of the court of facts and cannot be agitated in a second appeal.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of CPC, 1908 against the decree and judgment dated 13.11.2009 passed in A.S. No.69 of 2003, on the file of the Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Namakkal, upholding the decree and judgment dated 14.10.1999 passed in O.S. No.162 of 1997, on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Namakkal.)

1. The defendant in O.S. No.162 of 1997 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Namakkal (the appellant in A.S. No.69 of 2003 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Namakkal) has filed the present second appeal. The plaintiff Krishnasamy Reddiar filed the suit through his Power of Attorney holder Rengasamy Reddiar for recovery of possession of the suit property which is a tiled house in D.No.1/56 A, situate in Survey No.259/12 of Muttanchetti village from the defendant Venu Reddiar.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the trial court and at appropriate places, their rank in the present appeal would also be indicated.

3. The case of the plaintiff is that the suit property originally belonged to his father Krishnasamy Reddiar through a registered sale deed dated 27.08.1908 (Ex.A2) and that the defendant was inducted as a tenant on a monthly rent of Rs.25/-. It is the further case of the plaintiff that the defendant committed willful default in payment of rents since September 1996 and that though several demands were made by the plaintiff in person, the defendant did not pay any amount towards rent. He, therefore, issued a legal notice dated 04.02.1997 (Ex.A5) calling upon the defendant to vacate and deliver vacant possession of the suit property within a month. Though the defendant received the said notice as evidenced by the postal acknowledgment card (Ex.A6), there was no response from him. Hence, he filed the suit through his Power Agent (Power of Attorney Ex.A1) for recovery of possession and for costs.

4. In the written statement the defendant had denied all the allegations of the plaintiff. In fact, his contention is that he constructed a superstructure in a Government land which is on the southern side of Survey No.259/12 (suit land). According to him he has been paying necessary tax to the superstructure and that a patta (Ex.B1) dated 09.10.1997 was also issued to him. He, therefore, prayed for the dismissal of the suit.

5. The trial court after framing necessary issues and after full contest decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff with costs vide its decree and judgment dated 14.10.1999 on the following grounds.

1) The defendant did not specifically deny the landlord-tenant relationship between him and the plaintiff in his written statement.

2) The plaintiff had filed the sale deed (E.A2) and tax receipts (Ex.A3 and Ex.A4) in respect of the suit property.

3) The defendant obtained patta Ex.B1 subsequent to the filing of the suit and therefore no credence can be attached to the said document. No proper procedure was also followed by the Revenue Officials before issuing Ex.B1 patta.

4) Though the Village Administrative Officer of Muttanchetti village was examined as P.W.2, his deposition that Survey Numbers 431/10 and 431/11 (Old Survey No.259/12) are vacant lands cannot be accepted for the simple reason that he did not produce any records from his office. The Adangal extract of the year 1986 produced by him shows that Survey No.430/10 is a vacant land. However, if a house was constructed subsequent to 1986 it would not find place in the Adangal of the year 1986. The chitta is also not useful to decide the case.

5) The defendant did not examine himself as a witness to prove his contentions in the written statement.

6) The D.W.1 could not state the door number of the house in which she is residing.

7) The defendant though received the notice (Ex.A5) under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, he did not send any reply.

8) The boundary description found in Ex.A2 tally with the