S.A.No.1323 of 2002

N.SESHASAYEE, J.,

The dispute herein is with regard to a north-south lane that separates the properties of the contesting defendants herein and the plaintiff.

2.In the course of the argument, a statement is made that all the parties herein are relatives and possibly would have derived title to their respective properties through a common ancestor, namely Mottayakonar.

3.The disputed land has a width of 12 feet and according to the learned counsel for the appellant/defendant, this land originally had a width of only 6 feet. The properties of the appellant/first defendant is to the west of the said land.

4.According to the learned counsel for the respondent, the appellant/first defendant had parted with 6 feet on the eastern side of his property and thus, the width of the land became 12 feet.

5.In the pleadings, the appellant/defendant has also contended that there are remnants of mud wall along the edge of the 6 feet. However, no

Commissioner was taken by the appellant/defendant to prove this point.

N.SESHASAYEE, J., tsg

Today, a cement pavement is seen laid in the property of the defendant along the 6 feet, one which the defendant has parted with to make the width of the total lane to 12 feet. The cement portion clearly demarcates a boundary on the east that divides the six feet on the defendant's side and other 6 feet on the plaintiff's side.

6.The learned counsel for the appellant/first defendant submitted that the appellant may not be interested in the other 6 feet land running to the property of the respondent/plaintiff. She also showed a photograph which is not part of the record.

7.This Court now senses a strong possibility for settling the dispute amicably between the parties. The learned counsel on either side are directed to make available the respective parties on 06.03.2020.

8.Post the matter on 06.03.2020 under the caption 'part-heard'.

03.03.2020

S.A.No.1323/2002

S.A.No.1323 of 2002