IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

RESERVED ON : 10.07.2018

PRONOUNCED ON : 27.07.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAVINDRAN

S.A.Nos.2148 & 2149 of 2004

S.A.No.2148 of 2004

1. R.Ethirajammal

2. R.Ramachandran Naidu

..Appellants/1-2 Respondents/

Plaintiffs

Vs.

1. Y.Kavitha

Rep.by her power agent

Y.V.S.Reddy

2. Y.V.S.Reddy

.. Respondents/Appellants/

1 & 2 Defendants

3. Sri Raj & Co

Public Auctioners

7, Sunkurama chetty street,

Chennai – 1.

..3^rd Respondent/3^rd Respondent/

3^rd Defendant

Prayer:

Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure

Code, against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.136/1996 on the

file of 8^th Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai dated

29.09.1998 in reversing the judgment and decree in

O.S.No.224/1995 on the file of the 1^st Assistant Judge, City

Civil Court, Chennai dated 29.02.1996.

S. A.No.2149 of 2004

R.Ramachandran Naidu

...Appellant/

1^st Respondent/Plaintiff

Vs.

1. Kanakamma

Rep.by her power agent

Y.V.S.Reddy

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. Y.V.S.Reddy

.. 1 & 2 Respondents/Appellants/

1 & 2 Defendants

3. Sri Raj & Co, Public Auctioners

7, Sunkurama chetty street,

Chennai – 1.

.. 3^rd Respondents/2^nd Respondent/

3^rd Defendant

Prayer:

Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure

Code, against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.135/1996 on the

file of 8^th Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai dated

29.09.1998 in reversing the judgment and decree in

O.S.No.225/1995 on the file of the 1^st Assistant Judge, City

Civil Court, Chennai dated 29.02.1996.

In both second appeals

For Appellants

: Mr.V.Raghavachari

For Respondents

: No appearance/set ex-parte

vide order dated 10.07.2018

COMMON JUDGMENT

Second appeal No. 2148 of 2004 is directed against the

judgment and decree dated 29.09.1998, passed in A.S.No.136/1996,

on the file of 8^th Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai,

reversing the judgment and decree dated 29.02.1996, passed in

O.S.No.224/1995, on the file of the 1^st Assistant Judge, City

Civil Court, Chennai.

2. Second appeal No. 2149 of 2004 is directed against the

judgment and decree dated 29.09.1998, passed in A.S.No.135/1996,

on the file of 8^th Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai,

reversing the judgment and decree dated 29.02.1996, passed in

O.S.No.225/1995 on the file of the 1^st Assistant Judge, City

Civil Court, Chennai.

3. The second appeals have been admitted on the following

substantial questions of law:

1. Whether the mortgage dated 2.2.1982

is utterly barred by limitation or not?

2. Whether the auction sale dated

9.1.1995 is not in accordance with section 69

of the Transfer of Property Act or not?

3. For grant of injunction the

circumstances on the date of the plaint is to

be looked into and not the condition on the

date of trial or not?

4. The appreciation of the oral and

documentary evidence is not in the proper

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

perspective or not?

5. Whether the lower appellate Court is

right in reversing the judgment of the trial

Court in the absence of defendants 1 and 2 by

not making themselves available before the

court and tendering the best evidence?

6. Whether the evidence of DW1 is

acceptable when he had alleged that the

original document had not been received by

defendants 1 and 2 at the time of mortgage

transaction?

7. Whether the learned Judge ought not

to have adverted the parent document being

lodged in court in O.S. No.6106 of 1983?

8. Whether the discharge of Ex.A1 is not

established by the endorsement on Ex.A5 and

whether the findings of the lower appellate

Court that the endorsement cannot be relied

upon is perse reasonable?

9. Whether the lower appellate Court is

right in overlooking Ex.B6 wherein the final

amount had been tendered in 1990?

10. When the parent document had been

retu