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

2006 Supreme(Mad) 682

A.KULASEKARAN
S. Parthasarathy – Appellant
Versus
Durai @ Govindasamy & Others – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: For the Appellant :M. Kamalakannan, Advocate. For the Respondents:R3, P. Manoj Kumar, Advocate.

Judgment :-

(Second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 31.08.1995 made in A.S.No.175 of 1994 on the file of IV Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Madras confirming the judgment and decree dated 23.11.1993 made O.S.No.2891 of 1990 on the file of VII Assistant City Civil Court at Madras.)

The plaintiff, who has lost his case before both the Courts below, is the appellant herein.

2. The plaintiff filed the suit O.S.No.2891 of 1990 on the file of VII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai against the defendants, who are none other than his brothers and sister, for permanent injunction restraining them from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property.

3. The facts which are relevant for the disposal of the second appeal are as follows:- The plaintiff has purchased the suit land on 14.06.1969 under Ex.A.1 – Sale Deed. Admittedly, at the time of the said purchase, the plaintiff was unemployed. It is also not in dispute that the plaintiff got employment only in the year 1980 and he was appointed as Kalasi in the Southern Railway. On 17.12.1967, the father of the parties died and later on, their mother also died on 18.10.1999. It is the case of t










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