Exclusive ownership established by personal earnings; mere residence of family members does not create joint ownership rights.

JUDGMENT :

G.Jayachandran, J.

Suit for declaration of title and mandatory injunction to direct the defendants to vacate from the suit premises and hand over the vacant possession.

2. The case of the plaintiff:

The plaintiff and defendants 2 to 4 are children of late Ramadoss Naidu and Rajalakshmi (the first defendant). The plaintiff was gainfully employed at Anglo French Textiles at Pondicherry and through his personal earning, the suit property was purchased by him through two sale deeds dated 26.03.1997 and 26.10.1998. The plaintiff has been enjoying the property by putting up construction on it in the year 2003.

3. The defendants are the mother, brother and one of the sister of the plaintiff. They are staying in his house as permissive occupants. He had few more properties at Karasur Village and when those lands were acquired for the purpose of establishing Special Economic Zone, the defendants claimed share in it as if it is a joint family property. The issue was the subject matter of reference under Section 30 of LAND ACQUISITION ACT in L.A.O.P.No.57 of 2009, L.A.O.P.No.59 of 2009, L.A.O.P.No.60 of 2009 and L.A.O.P.No.61 of 2009. After enquiry, the Principal District Court vide, order dated 16.07.2013 held that those properties are the exclusive property of the plaintiff.

4. Out of 23 kuzhies and 3 Veesam purchased under the two sale deeds, the plaintiff had sold 3 kuzhies and 4 veesam on the western side in R.S.Nos.68/4 and 68/5 to one Ramamoorthy on 26.10.1998. The remaining land measuring 19 kuzhis and 05 veesams at Cad No:87/ 1/3/1 pt, 87/ 1/3/2pt in R.S.Nos.68/4, 68/5 and 68/7 in Karasur Village, Villianur Panchayat along with a single storied terraced building bearing Door No:6, Main Road, Karasur Village, Kadaperikuppam(Post) and Coconut thope is the subject matter of the suit.

5. The defendants, who are permissive occupants, made an attempt to open a new entrance to the suit property on 14.08.2012 which was prevented by the plaintiff with the help of elders in the village and by lodging police complaint. He also filed a suit for injunction in O.S.No.1277 of 2012 before the III Additional Munsif Court, Puduchery for permanent injunction against the defendants. The suit was dismissed and against which he has preferred A.S.No.7 of 2014 before the Additional Sub-ordinate Court at Puducherry and pending. The defendants with the intention to grab the property made all attempts, hence after causing notice on 25.08.2014, revoking the permission, the suit for declaration and delivery of possession is laid.

6. Pending suit, the first defendant Rajalakshmi died. Hence, her other daughter Sarasu, who was not a party, initially was brought on record by amending the plaint.

7. Case of the defendants:

The suit property is not the exclusive property of the plaintiff. Being the eldest son of the family, the properties were purchased in the name of the plaintiff from the joint family income. The family had ancestral property at Karasur Village, which they inherited from their great- great- grandfather Mr.Naina Naidu. Their father Ramdoss Naidu is the son of Thirumalai Naidu, S/o Muthukrishna Naidu, S/o Ellusamy Naidu, S/o Balarama Naidu, S/o Naina Naidu the propositus.

8. While in employment at AFT Mills, Puducherry, their father Ramdoss died on 23.12.1988 in harness. Upon the consent given by the defendants, the plaintiff was given compassionate appointed in AFT Mills. The suit property and several other properties were purchased in the name of the plaintiff being the eldest son and manager of the fami