IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Reserved on 06.03.2023 Delivered on 28.02.2024 CORAM:

The Honourable Mr.Justice Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup C.R.P.No.1327 of 2020 and C.M.P.No.7276 of 2020 Dr.T.Chinnaraju ... Petitioner/Petitioner/Plaintiff -Vs-

1.S.Thomas

2.Mariya Shoba

3.A.Vijayashanthi

4.Madhammal ... Respondents/Respondents/

Defendants Prayer:- Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 05.02.2020 made in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No.52 of 2015 on the file of the learned Additional Special Judge, Krishnagiri.

For Petitioner : Ms.Mithraneshaa for M/s.V.Srimathi For Respondents : Mr.J.Hariharan for M/s.V.Nicholas

O R D E R

This Civil Revision Petition had been filed to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 05.02.2020 made in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No.52 of

2015 on the file of the learned Additional Special Judge, Krishnagiri.

2. The learned Counsel Ms.Mithraneshaa for M/s.Srimathi, learned Counsel appearing for the Revision Petitioner submitted that the Plaintiff in O.S.No.52 of 2015 on the file of the learned Additional Special Judge, Krishnagiri, is the Revision Petitioner. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioner that the suit in O.S. No.52 of 2015 was pending from the year 2015 onwards. The Plaintiff is aged about 85 years. He had filed the suit for declaration of his title to the suit property and also seeking permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property. Also seeking permanent injunction restraining the Defendants, their men, authorised agents from in any way dealing or alienating the suit property in any manner. The learned Counsel for the Plaintiff invited the attention of this Court to the averments in the plaint, copy of which is enclosed in the typed set. The Plaintiff purchased the property in the year 1992. Originally, the property was part of Survey No.58/2 of Pedhathalapalli Village measuring 2.78.5 Hectares, belonging to the father of the first Defendant. After the death of the father of the first Defendant, there was a partition amongst the heirs of Iyyadurai @ Sowriappa Mudaliar. At the time of partition, Survey number was not subdivided. As per the partition deed, Susai Mary wife of Sowriappa Mudaliar and S.Joseph, son of Iyyadurai @ Sowriappa Mudaliar were granted 2 acres and 16 cents. The said Susaimary and S.Joseph entered into an agreement of sale on 26.10.1986 in favour of one S.Vajjiravel, B.Manickam and S.Munusamy and they in turn agreed to sell the property to the Plaintiff on 12.02.1987. There were 49 plots in the property of Susaimary and S.Joseph. The Plaintiff had purchased Plot No.6 from the agreement holders. By mistake, the Power of Attorney seems to have executed the sale deed giving wrong number of power of attorney. Actually the parties to the Plot No.6 alone agreed to sell the property. The description given in the sale deed tallies with the Plot No.6. The description of property in Doc.No.31 of 1987 was handed over in possession to the Plaintiff and he is in possession from the year 1992. During the life time of Joseph, he filed a suit for recovery of possession. In that plaint, he did not claim possession of Plot No.6. He had admitted in the plaint that except the suit property, all other portions were sold. From the plaint in O.S.No.110 of 2007, the said Joseph did not claim the sold plots. The said Joseph is alleged to have executed a Will. Plot No.6 is not the subject matter of the Will. From the date of sale, both the parties were aware of the sale of Plot No.6 to the Plaintiff herein as per sale deed dated 11.12.1992. Therefore, the Plaintiff is in possession of the property under the bona fide impression that he purchased the property i.e., Plot No.6 in Survey No.58/2C from Joseph. Recently the Defendants herein attempted to encroach on the property and attempted to alienate the property claiming unde