Suseela vs K.Govindaraj (Died)
2024 Latest Caselaw 18530 Mad

Madras High Court

Suseela vs K.Govindaraj (Died) on 19 September, 2024

Author: T.V.Thamilselvi

Bench: T.V.Thamilselvi

                                                                     S.A. No.632 of 2024

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                               DATED : 19.09.2024

                                                    CORAM:

                                   THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

                                               S.A. No.632 of 2024

                     C.Govindaraj (died)

                     1. Suseela
                     2. Nalayani @ Nalina
                     3. Lakshmi
                     4. Parvathy
                     5. Kirushnaveni
                     6. Vasuki
                     7. Menaga                                        ... Appellants

                                                      Vs.

                     K.Govindaraj (died)

                     1. Sarasu
                     2. Vijaya
                     3. Sankar
                     4. Kumaran

                     Siva @ Sivanandhan (died)

                     5. Boomi
                     6. Sarasu

                     Karunakaran (died)

                     1/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                 S.A. No.632 of 2024


                     7. Deepa
                     8. Minor Aravindan
                     9. Minor Anandhi                                              .. Respondents


                     PRAYER : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil

                     Procedure, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 01.11.2022 passed

                     in A.S.No.9 of 2022 on the file of Principal Subordinate Judge, Vellore

                     confirming the judgment and decree dated 30.11.2021 passed in

                     O.S.No.248 of 2008 on the file of Addl. District Munsif Court, Vellore.

                                        For Appellants          : Mr.S.Raja Ravi Varma


                                                         JUDGMENT

The appellants/plaintiffs have filed a suit in O.S.No.248 of 2008

against the respondents/defendants seeking for the relief of declaration to

declare the title over the suit property stating that their parents have

purchased the property. Pending suit, Govindaraj died and after his

demise, the plaintiffs, who are his legal heirs, have contested the suit.

Before the trial court, they have not filed any document to prove that the

suit property belong to their parents. However, they relied Ex.A1, it was

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

the certificate issued by the court marked as Ex.A1 dated 06.02.1928,

which is only a sale certificate issued by the court except that there is no

title deed produced on the side of plaintiffs to prove their title. So, the

courts below have not accepted the claim of plaintiffs that they are the

owners of property and suit was dismissed as they have not proved their

title. Against which, they preferred an appeal in A.S.No. 9 of 2022 before

the Principal Subordiante Judge, Vellore and the first appellate judge

independently analysed the facts and evidence and concludes that Ex.A2

also as a document relied on by the plaintiffs in order to prove their title

over the property, but it is only a bond issued by the society. Based on

that Ex.A2, the first appellate court had not accepted the claim of

plaintiffs and dismissed the appeal confirming the findings of trial court.

Challenging the said findings, the plaintiffs have preferred this Second

Appeal.

2. The learned counsel for appellants would submit that the courts

below failed to appreciate Ex.A2, which proves the fact that the parents

of plaintiffs deposited the title deed into the bank while availing loan.

According to appellants' counsel, parents of plaintiffs have purchased the

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

property in the year of 1928. So, they have given sale certificate and even

in their pleadings, the plaintiffs have stated that their parents purchased

the property as they approached the court to prove their case beyond

reasonable doubt by producing title deed, but they have not produced any

title deed. Only the sale certificate issued by the court and the bond

issued by the society were produced, which are not valid documents.

Therefore, the courts below rightly appreciated the facts, which needs no

interference. Hence, I do not find any merit in this Second Appeal as there

is no substantial question of law involved. Accordingly, this Second Appeal

is dismissed. No costs.

                                                                                    19.09.2024

                     Index      : Yes / No
                     Internet   : Yes / No
                     Speaking/Non-speaking order
                     rpp

                     To

                     Sub-Judge, Vellore.






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





                                  T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.


                                                      rpp









                                             19.09.2024






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