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

1996 Supreme(Kar) 152

P.KRISHNA MOORTHY
MUNIYAPPA – Appellant
Versus
RAMAIAH – Respondent


P. KRISHNA MOORTHY, J.

( 1 ) THE defendant in a Suit for injunction is the Revision Petitioner. The plaintiff filed a Suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with his possession of the plaint schedule property, alleging that he purchased the same from one Chinnappa, the brother of the defendant under a Registered Sale Deed dated 26-3-1984. Chinnappa obtained the property on 30-4-1982 on the basis of an order under the Inams Abolition Act. It is alleged by the plaintiff that he is put in possession of the plaint schedule property and the Revenue Records has been changed in his name. He has also secured a loan of Rs. 4,09,500/- from a Financial Institution on the security of the plaint schedule land. The defendant, who has no manner of right over the plaint schedule property, is attempting to trespass into the suit schedule property and accordingly, the suit is filed for permanent injunction. Along with the suit, the plaintiff also filed I. A. II under O. 39, R. 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure for a temporary injunction restraining the defendant from encroaching on the suit schedule property.

( 2 ) THE defendant filed an objection contending that the














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