J U D G M E N T

(The case has been heard through video conference)

The plaintiff has come to the Court challenging the concurrent Judgment and Decree of the Courts below in which the suit has been filed for the following reliefs:

"(a) Declaring the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property and consequential permanent injunction restraining the 2nd defendant, her men, agents, legal heirs, relatives, or anybody claiming through her in any manner from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. (b)Declaring the sale deed registered as D.No.104/1999 dated 14-7-1998 on the file of Sub Registrar Office, Kotagiri executed by plaintiff's father in favour of the 1st defendant's son late. B.B.Raju as null and void as far as

0.92 acre pertaining to the suit schedule property.

(c)Declaring the gift settlement deed registered as D.No. 630/2010 dated 29-4-2010 on the file of Sub Registrar Office, Kotagiri executed by 1st defendant to 2nd defendant as null and void as far as 0.92 acre pertaining to the suit schedule property.

2.The parties are referred to in the same litigative status as before the trial court for an ease of understanding.

3.The plaintiff has come to the Court stating that the suit schedule property and the adjacent lands were purchased by his father K.R.Hiriya Gowder along with other purchasers under a registered Sale deed dated 26.06.1965. He would contend that the property was purchased from the common funds of his family earnings though it stands in the name of his father, his father has no individual right over the Sale.

4.The plaintiff would further state that on 23.12.1997, the suit schedule property was put in the common hotchpot and was orally partitioned among the family members in the presence of village panchayatars in which the suit schedule property was allotted to the share of the plaintiff, i.e., an extent of 92 cents in S.F.No.156 (Old No.274/2) along with 8 cents in Survey No.280 of Konavakkorai village. This oral partition according to the plaintiff was reduced into writing in a Panchayat Mutchalika on the same day, viz. 23.12.1997 and signed by the plaintiff, his father and his brothers, namely, H.Chandrasekar and H.Suresh Kumar. In the partition, the plaintiff's father was not allotted any land in the suit schedule Survey Number.

Therefore, the suit schedule property became the exclusive property of the plaintiff. The plaintiff's father died on 25.11.2005. The plaintiff would submit that he is in physical possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property measuring 0.92 acres in Konavakkorai village and comprised in Survey No.156 which correlates with the Old Survey No.274/2. The property in question falls within the following boundaries:

"On the East the land is flanked by Forest, On the West by lands belonging to Gopal, Sennuguru, K.M.Nanjaiah Legal heir properties, On the North by A.Santhaian legal heirs properties and On the South by S.No.280 property."

It is also the case of the plaintiff that his name has been mutated in all the revenue records and that he has been paying the Revenue Tax in respect of the said property.

5.On 19.04.2012, the plaintiff came to understand that the suit schedule property was sold along with other properties by his father to the son of the 1st defendant, viz., Late B.B.Raju under a registered Sale Deed dated 14.07.1998. The said B.B.Raju died as a bachelor without any issue. Thereafter. the 1st defendant has conveyed the suit property to the 2nd defendant his grand daughter and the same was registered under a Gift Deed on 29.04.2010. It is the further case of the plaintiff that both documents do not bind him as his father had no right to sell his share to the defendants since the parties had entered into a Panchayat Mutchalika as early as on 23.12.1997 and the property had been allotted to him.

6.It is also the further case of the plaintiff that he continues to be in possession and enjoyment of the suit