A.No.3668 of 2022

in C.S.No.343 of 2012

A.No.3668 of 2022 in

C.S.No.343 of 2012

Reserved On :

28.09.2022

Pronounced On:

18.10.2022

G.CHANDRASEKHARAN.J.,

This application has been filed for pronouncement of judgment and

decree in C.S.No.343 of 2012 on the basis of admissions made by P.W.1

during the course of his evidence.

2.The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the second

applicant/third plaintiff along with her mother, applicants 1 and 4 filed the

main suit for declaring the plaintiffs 2 to 4 as the absolute owners of 'F'

schedule property, for possession of 'F' schedule property and for the

consequential relief of directing the defendants to vacate and deliver

possession of 'F' schedule property; for declaration that plaintiffs 2 to 4 are

the absolute owners of 'G' schedule property, possession of 'G' schedule

property and for permanent injunction against the defendants in respect of

'G' schedule property. The defendants 1 and 2 filed written statement.

Mother Padmavathi died on 04.11.2019. Plaintiffs 2 to 4 are the legal heirs

1/19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.No.3668 of 2022

in C.S.No.343 of 2012

of deceased Padmavathi. Defendants 1 and 2 in C.S.No.343 of 2012 filed

C.S.No.435 of 2009 before this Court. That suit was transferred to City

Civil Court and re-numbered as O.S.No.10807 of 2010 and was pending

before V^th Additional City Civil Court, Chennai. On the basis of

application by the plaintiffs, the said suit in O.S.No.10807 of 2010 was

transferred to this Court and for joint trial along with the suit in

C.S.No.343 of 2012. O.S.No.10807 of 2010 was re-numbered in this

Court as C.S.No.277 of 2017. Evidence was recorded in C.S.No.277 of

2017 before the learned Master in the joint trial. First defendant was

examined as P.W.1 in C.S.No.277 of 2017. He was cross examined by the

plaintiffs. When he was cross examined, he stated that he is not claiming

any right over Survey Nos.283/1 and 283/3 and he has no objection for

granting the reliefs to the plaintiffs in C.S.No.343 of 2012, since he has

not claimed any right over the properties in Survey Nos.283/1 and 283/3.

In view of this candid admission by P.W.1, there is nothing survives for

trial of the suit in C.S.No.343 of 2012. The suit in C.S.No.343 of 2012 is

filed for Survey Nos.283/1 and 283/3. When P.W.1 has no claim against

these properties, the suit in C.S.No.343 of 2012 has to be decreed on the

2/19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.No.3668 of 2022

in C.S.No.343 of 2012

basis of this admission.

3.Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that

applicants filed the present suit for declaring that they are the absolute

owners of 'E, F & G' schedule properties and for possession. However,

they concealed and suppressed the dismissal of the earlier suit filed on the

file of City Civil Court, Chennai. Respondents filed C.S.No.435 of 2009

for recovery of possession of 'B' schedule property in C.S.No.435 of 2009

and for the declaration that conveyances effected in respect of the suit

property as illegal, invalid and non-est apart from claiming damages for

use and occupation. On account of enhancement of pecuniary jurisdiction,

C.S.No.435 of 2009 was transferred to City Civil Court and numbered as

O.S.No.10807 of 2010. Again it was transferred to this Court and re-

numbered as C.S.No.277 of 2017. The trial had commenced in City Civil

Court. P.W.1 was partly cross examined. After transferring to this Court

additional proof affidavit was filed. Thereafter, P.W.1 was cross examined.

This application filed based on the certain portion of the cross examination

of P.W.1 is not maintainable. Cross examination cannot be read in

isolation. The answers given in the cross examination do not amount to

3/19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.No.3668 of 2022

in C.S.No.343 of 2012

admission of fact. Ex.A6 and Ex.A7 are true documents. P.W.1 has not

admitted the titl