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

1991 Supreme(Ker) 238

RAMAKRISHNAN
Vawakkavu Muslim Thaikkavupally – Appellant
Versus
Narayanan Purushan – Respondent


Judgment :-

Appellants are defendants in a suit for injunction filed by the respondents in this appeal. Appellant No.1 is a Mosque and appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are its President and Secretary. Respondents land 2 are husband and wife and the 3rd respondent is the father of the second respondent and power of attorney holder of respondents 1 and 2.

2. The three questions of law formulated and on which notice has been ordered in the appeal are the following:

"(i) From the facts of this case, is not the suit bad for non joinder of the state as a party in the suit?

(ii) In the absence of a claim for easement, can a plaintiff sue for the relief of injunction without alleging at least possession over the property with respect to which plaintiff prays for injunction against the defendants?

(Hi) In a case of dispute regarding existence of a way and the use of the same by the plaintiff, can a finding be entered discarding the oral evidence in the case?

3. The brief facts necessary for deciding the questions of law formulated in the appeal are: plaint A schedule property, 121/2 cents in extent, admittedly belongs to plaintiffs 1 and 2 and it is in the possession and management of the 3rd plaintiff. P

























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