P.BHAVADASAN
Chinnayya Mudaliyar – Appellant
Versus
Vasudevan – Respondent
1. The defendant, who suffered a decree in O.S. 71 of 1985 before the Munsiff's court, Mannarghat and whose appeal was dismissed by the lower appellate court is the appellant. The parties and facts are hereinafter referred to as they are available before the trial court.
2. According to the plaintiff, the suit property belonged in jenm to one Mannarghat Moopilsthanam and one Chellan obtained it on oral lease. He sold the property to the plaintiff's mother Masammal as per registered deed No.2550/61. Masammal constructed a shop building in the property. She assigned rest of the property except 6 cents of the property wherein the shop building situate. According to the plaintiff, Masammal had given the building on rent to the defendant. Since the defendant defaulted in payment of rent, O.S. 112 of 1975 was instituted for arrears of rent. Even though the trial court decreed the suit, the first appellate court and the second appellate court were of the view that the tenancy arrangement had not been proved, and therefore the trial court decree was reversed. Thereafter Masammal sold the property to the plaintiff as per deed No.312/85 of SRO Mannarghat. It is contended that the d
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.