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

2005 Supreme(Mad) 865

R.BANUMATHI
Kandasamy & Another – Appellant
Versus
M. Palanisamy & Others – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:For The Petitioners:P.Valliappan, Advocate. For The Respondents:P.Mathivanan, Advocate.

Judgment :-

This revision is directed against the order of the District Munsif, Mettur, dated 31-03-2003 in I.A.No. 208 of 2003 in O.S.No. 48 of 1997 allowing the petition filed under Or. 1 R. 10 (2) C.P.C. The defendants 2 and 3 are the Revision Petitioners.

2. The brief facts necessitated for disposal of this revision petition could briefly be stated thus:

The suit property relates to a house with the vacant site thereon in Amani Surapalli Village, Ist Ward in East Alamara Theru, Jalakandapuram Sub-Registration District. The case of the plaintiff is that the suit property has been purchased by the plaintiff and his brother Madaiyya Chettiar by a sale deed dated 27-4-1953. From the date of purchase both of them were in possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The brother of the plaintiff Madaiyya Chettiar died about 10 years ago. Even after his death, the plaintiff continued to be in possession of the suit property as absolute owner. House tax assessment has been levied in the name of the plaintiff and he has been regularly paying the house tax to the Local Body. The defendants' house is situated on the West of the suit property. The defendants have no manner of right, title o












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