JUDGMENT

The suit in O.S.No.1917 of 2016 was instituted by the first respondent for declaration to declare that the unilateral cancellation of settlement deed, dated 17.02.2010 as null and void and to declare that the settlement deed, dated 15.05.2014 as null and void, unenforceable in law; for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men and agents from alienating or encumbering the suit property and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men and agents from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment over the suit property and for costs.

2. The case of the plaintiff is that the property measuring about

1743 sq.ft comprised in T.S.No.36, Puliyur Village, Egmore-Nungambakkam Taluk bearing Door No.20/10, Gangai Amman Koil 2nd Street, Vadapalani was originally purchased by his mother Devaki Ammal, through sale deed, dated 22.03.1980. Since then, the plaintiff's parents, the plaintiff and his family members were in possession and enjoyment of the property.

3. It is the further case of the plaintiff that his mother Devaki Ammal settled the suit property measuring an extent of 900 sq.ft in favour of the plaintiff by a registered settlement deed, dated 11.09.2007 and on the same day, another settlement deed was executed in favour of the first defendant, by settling the remaining portion existing in the northern side measuring about 693 sq.ft together with the remaining half share in the common passage. In the above settlement deeds, the plaintiff's mother had reserved and retained life interest for her and her husband and the same was accepted by the plaintiff. The plaintiff's father and mother died on

18.09.2013 and 10.02.2016 respectively.

4. It is further stated that during her life time, the plaintiff had taken care of his mother. The plaintiff constructed a building admeasuring about 600 sq.ft with his own funds. While so, on the very next day of the funeral of Devaki Ammal, the defendants approached the plaintiff and demanded for partition of the suit property and started quarreling with him. Then only, the plaintiff became aware of the fact that his mother Devaki Ammal had unilaterally cancelled the settlement deed executed in favour of the plaintiff by a cancellation deed, dated 17.02.2010 and execution of another settlement deed in favour of the first defendant, dated 15.05.2014. It is alleged that the unilateral cancellation of the registered settlement deed, dated 17.02.2010 was under coercion and undue influence of the defendants.

5. In the written statement filed by the defendants 1 to 4, the allegations and averments made in the plaint were denied and refuted. It is stated that it is true that Devaki Ammal executed a conditional settlement deed on 11.09.2007, by settling the suit property on the southern side in favour of the plaintiff and northern side in favour of the defendants. In both the settlement deeds, a specific condition was imposed creating life estate in favour of the mother Devaki Ammal and after her life time in favour of the father of the plaintiff and defendants, viz., P.Shankar. During the life time of the deceased Shankar, after the execution of the above settlement deed in favour of the plaintiff, there was difference of opinion among the children of the deceased Devaki Ammal and there was a dispute over the enjoyment of the property.

6. It is further alleged that the plaintiff had not taken proper care and had not given proper maintenance to his mother Devaki Ammal. Therefore, after having dissatisfied with the behaviour of the plaintiff, the mother Devaki Ammal cancelled the settlement deed executed in favour of the plaintiff. It is further stated that only the third defendant maintained Devaki Ammal till her death and the construction was put up by Devaki Ammal and by none else. The limitation period of three years had been lapsed to file the suit from the date of cancellation of settlement deed in the year 2010. Therefore, on the ground of limitation, th