J U D G M E N T

This Second Appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree passed by the Subordinate Court, Vaniyambadi (first Appellate Court) in A.S.No.1 of 2012, in confirming the judgment and decree passed by the Principal District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Vaniyambadi, Vellore District (trial Court) in O.S.No.67 of 2003, dated 27.09.2011. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein shall be referred hereinafter as per the rank assigned in the suit, unless and otherwise, they are specifically referred to as per the status in this Second Appeal.

3. The unsuccessful defendants are the appellants herein.

4. The plaintiff filed the suit for the relief of permanent injunction and for costs.

5. The case of the plaintiff, as averred in the plaint, in short are as follows:-

i) The suit property is an ancestral property and originally it belonged to one Rathinamal and Santha Bai. Since the predecessors in title of the property were unable to maintain the property, they leased out the property in favour of the plaintiff's father by name Kumara Goundar, vide Muchalika, dated 04.05.1964, on an yearly rent of Rs.1213/-. Pursuant to such lease hold right, the plaintiff's father was enjoying the property as a cultivating tenant and got registered himself as cultivating tenant under the Tamil Nadu Tenancy Act. The owners were not in the practice of issuing any receipt in regard to the rent paid by the plaintiff's father. Thereafter, in the year, 1974, the first defendant and her husband purchased the property and even after the said purchase, the plaintiff's father was in enjoyment of the property as a cultivating tenant. After the purchase, the first defendant and her husband demanded higher rent, and since the plaintiff's father refused to pay higher rent, the first defendant and her husband filed a petition under the Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, on 21.04.1986, for collecting the arrears of rents due from the plaintiff's father from 1974 to 1983, for a total sum of Rs.12,000/- and in the said case, a compromise was entered into between the parties, wherein, the plaintiff's father agreed to settle the amount to the first defendant and her husband and memo was also filed to that effect, and the said memo is filed as one of the documents in this case. Henceforth, the plaintiff's father remained as cultivating tenant and was enjoying the property.

ii) Again, the first defendant and her husband filed a case before the Revenue Court, Cuddalore, in C.T.P.No.7 of 1996, demanding arrears of rent. However, in the meantime, during the year 1997, the plaintiff's father died and the Petition filed in C.T.P.No.7 of 1996 was dismissed for default on 21.05.1998, for non appearance of the parties. According to the plaintiff, after the demise of his father, he was recognized as a cultivating tenant.

iii) The husband of the first defendant passed away during the year 2003. Thereafter, the plaintiff not paid the rent for 2002-2003, for, due to drought, no agricultural activity took place during the said period. After the demise of the first defendant's husband, the first defendant and her children, viz., respondent 2 to 4 with an intention to evict the plaintiff were in the habit of causing hindrances and troubles to the agricultural activities carried out by him and they also with the assistance of the henchmen, trespassed into his property, so as to evict him. The plaintiff is a poor man, though some how he managed such hectic situation and retained the property in his hold, since the defendants are affluent and they can achieve whatever they desire, the plaintiff apprehends that the defendants may trespass into his property at any point of time, and disturb his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property. Therefore, the plaintiff filed the present suit seeking for the relief of permanent injunction, restraining the defendants, either directly or through their men, agents, etc. to enter into his property, except, under due pr