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

2017 Supreme(SC) 80

DIPAK MISRA, R.BANUMATHI
V. RAJENDRAN – Appellant
Versus
ANNASAMY PANDIAN (D) THR. LRS. KARTHYAYANI NATCHIAR – Respondent


JUDGMENT

R. BANUMATHI, J.

Leave granted.

2. This appeal arises out of the impugned order dated 09.03.2015 passed by the High Court of Madras at Madurai Bench allowing C.R.P. NPD (MD) No. 248 of 2015, thereby declining the leave to the appellants to withdraw the suit.

3. Case of appellants-plaintiffs is that originally the suit property was the ancestral property of Annasamy Pandian, who is the father of the respondent-Karthyayani Natchiar herein and the patta for the entire suit property was issued in the name of Annasamy Pandian and his relatives (Pangaligal). The said Annasamy Pandian appointed one Thangaraj as his power agent to deal with his property by a registered Power of Attorney Deed dated 09.09.1999. Based upon the said Power of Attorney, the appellants purchased the said suit property from Thangaraj under four sale deeds i.e. 50 cents each. The appellants being husband and wife, fenced the suit property purchased by them and possessed and enjoyed the same as a single property. The Tahsildar of Kadaladi has passed an order dated 31.03.2003, confirming the appellants’ purchase and possession over the suit property. Further case of the appellants is that on the application

















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