Back
PANKAJ MITHAL, S. V. N. BHATTI
J. Ganapatha – Appellant
Versus
N. Selvarajalou Chetty Trust Rep. by Its Trustees – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.V.N. BHATTI, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The Civil Appeal arises from the confirming judgment and the decree dated 08.09.2016 in O.S.A. No. 230 of 2007 of the High Court of Judicature at Madras. The Civil Appeal is at the instance of Defendant Nos. 3 to 6 in C.S. No. 504 of 1998 on the file of the High Court of Judicature at Madras. For convenience, we refer to the parties as arrayed in C.S. No. 504 of 1998.
3. The following circumstances are chronologically noted to appreciate the challenge to the impugned judgments and the decrees:
| 1929 | One Somasundaram Chettiar purchased an extent of 0.75 cents (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Plaint Schedule’) through a registered sale deed. Padmini Chandrasekaran D/o late N. Selvarajalou Chetty. Somasundaram Chettiar is the brother in law of the late N. Selvarajalou Chetty. |
| 1952 | For resolving the right and title to the property left behind by her father, Padmini Chandrasekaran filed C.S. No. 329 of 1952 on the Original Side of the High Court of Judicature at Madras against N. Somasundaram and another. The original suit was decreed, resulting in the filing of O.S.A. |
(1) Power of Court to mould relief – Court aims that justice is served while taking into account evolving nature of a case – Relief is moulded as an exception and not as a matter of course.(2) Court ....
The court reaffirmed that administrative orders must respect established legal rights confirmed by judicial proceedings, quashing the directive for civil dispute adjudication.
The sale deed executed without valid payment consideration is deemed sham, preventing any title transfer, establishing that property ownership remains with original heirs under the valid Will.
Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate ownership or possession over the ancestral property, while defendants proved their title through documented evidence, leading to suit dismissal.
The court affirmed that ancestral property cannot be sold without consent from all coparceners, rendering the sale agreement unenforceable.
The plaintiff's mother became the absolute owner of the suit schedule properties by virtue of the Ryotwari Patta granted in her name under Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Estates (Abolition and Conversi....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that sale deeds executed in violation of an injunction order are void, and the doctrine of lis pendens applies to such transactions.
Point of law : Where a cloud is raised over the plaintiff's title and he does not have possession, a suit for declaration and possession, with or without a consequential injunction, is the remedy. Wh....
The sale made by a guardian is voidable, but a suit to challenge it must be filed within the limitation period. Failure to challenge intervening sale deeds and non-joinder of necessary parties can le....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
