SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(SC) 1305

S.B.SINHA, HARJIT SINGH BEDI
T. Vijendradas – Appellant
Versus
M. Subramanian – Respondent


JUDGMENT:

S.B. SINHA, J :

1.Leave granted.

2.A short but interesting question in regard to interpretation of Order XXI, Rule 92(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, CPC) is involved in this appeal.

Facts :

3.R. Venugopal (since deceased), original defendant No.3, was the owner of the suit property consisting of 8 cents and 116 sq. ft. of land situated within the Coimbatore Municipal Corporation (for short, the Municipality). He transferred his right, title and interest therein by reason of a registered deed of sale in favour of one Sakunthala, the original plaintiff no. 1 in the suit and mother of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein. It is, however, not in dispute that the factum of sale was not intimated to the authorities of the Municipality either by the vendor or by the vendee thereof. The vendee s name was not mutated in the records of the Municipality. Indisputably, property tax in respect of premises in question had not been paid for the period from 01.04.1970 to 31.03.1973. The property tax for two quarters, thus, was to be paid by Venugopal whereas the rest was to be paid by the vendee. The matter relating to payment of property tax is governed by the Tamil Nadu Dis
























































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top