JUDGMENT

This appeal arises out of the concurrent findings recorded by the Principal Munsiff Court, Neyyattinkara in O.S.No.34/2002 and Sub Court, Neyyattinkara in A.S.No.95/2004.

2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows:

2.1. The appellant/plaintiff instituted a suit for declaration of title, putting up of boundary, injunction and claiming damages for the loss caused at the hands of the defendants. The plaintiff claimed right, title and interest over the plaint schedule property by virtue of a mortgage assignment vide Document No.2893/1984 executed by one Kamalam. Kamalam had obtained the said property by virtue a Mortgage Deed No.6314/1965. Earlier, the property was in occupation of Kamalam by a Mortgage Deed No.3827 of 1119 ME. Subsequently, the mortgage was redeemed and a member of the family had executed a fresh mortgage in favour of Kamalam, which was in turn assigned in the favour of the plaintiff.

2.2. The defendants 1 and 2 were the President and Secretary of Sri.Mahadeva Kshethra Samarakshana Samithy, Parassala. According to the defendants, the mortgage itself is bad, because it is executed by one of the members of the family without the per