Ownership claims require clear documentary evidence; failure to establish title results in denial of relief.

JUDGMENT :

The appellant has filed this appeal against the portion of the judgment and decree dated 08.04.2021 passed in O.S. No. 9123 of 2019 by the learned XVI Additional City Civil Judge, Chennai.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as they were ranked in the original suit.

3. The appellant herein is the plaintiff in Suit O.S. No. 9123 of 2019 (C.S. No. 1168 of 2009) on the file of the XVI Additional City Civil Court, Chennai. The plaintiff/appellant filed the said suit before the trial court seeking a declaration, permanent injunction, mandatory injunction, compensation, and other consequential reliefs against 11 defendants. The suit was contested by defendants 1, 2, and 4 to 11. After hearing both sides and considering the evidence on record, the learned trial judge partly allowed the suit. The court declared the plaintiff as the absolute owner of a vacant land measuring 2,119 sq. ft., excluding a portion in the B-schedule property, namely 280 sq. ft., described as running 70 feet East to West, 3.7 feet North to South on the eastern side, and 4.4 feet North to South on the western side, situated on the northern corner of the A-schedule property. The relief of a permanent injunction was granted to this extent alone. However, the reliefs of mandatory injunction and compensation were dismissed.

4. Challenging the said findings, the plaintiff preferred this appeal on the following grounds:

i. The judgment and decree of the trial court refusing to grant title, permanent injunction mandatory injunction and compensation to the Appellant herein with regard to suit schedule 'B' property, is contrary to law, weight of evidence and probabilities of the case.

ii. The trial court committed an error in rejecting the title of the appellant in respect of suit schedule 'B' property being part of suit schedule 'A' property admeasuring 280 sq.ft situated on the northern corner of Schedule 'A' property admeasuring 2399 sq.ft. comprised in Survey No. 145/1, then T.S.No.30, currently T.S.No.33, Old Block No.41, New Block No.36, Thiruvalluvar Street, Velachery, Chennai-600 042.

iii. The trial court, having accepted the title of the appellant with reference suit schedule 'A' property admeasuring 2119 sq.ft. based on the documents of title viz. (i) Ex.B1 Release Deed dated 09.08.1966 registered as Documerz No.2583/1966 executed by V.P.Sundaram in favour of his brother P.Govindarajan (vendor of the appellant), (ii) Ex.A2 sale deed dated 14.11.1994 registered as Document No.412/1994 executed by P.Govindarajan to and in favour of the appellant, (iii) Ex.A3 Exchange deed dated 09.01.1997 registered as Documem No.62/1997 executed between P.Govindarajan and the appellant exchanging 32 feet and 33 sq.ft. respectively in the same Survey Number for convenient enjoyment, ought to have granted the relief of declaration of title to the appellant in respect of the balance land admeasuring 280 sq.ft. being the suit schedule 'B' property forming part of suit schedule "A" property.

iv. The findings of the trial court had literally left the suit schedule 'B' property in O.S.No.9123/2019 with no owner and the question of title in limbo.

v. The trial court has entirely ignored Ex.B1 being the Release Deed dated 09.08.1966 registered as Document No.2583/1966 pertaining to the larger extent of lands in S.No.145/1 executed by V.P.Sundaram, son of Perumal, giving up his right in the subject property to and in favour of his brother Govindarajan, son of Perumal, the vendor of the appellant herein. This document categorically describes the lefger extent of lands in the schedule to the Release Deed for S.No.145/1 (viz., Grama Natham lands) with clear description of boundaries together with a house thereon. Therefore, As a matter of fact, in line with the reported judgment of this Hon'ble Court in 2012 (2) CTC (315) State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Madasamy and others, the trial court ought to have recognized the unfettered title of Perumal and his children in