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

2000 Supreme(Mad) 60

P.SATHASIVAM
S. Umapathy – Appellant
Versus
Arunachalam Pattankattiar and Another – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:A. Sankarasubramanian, K. Srinivasan, Advocates.

Judgment :-

Aggrieved by the order of remand made by the Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli in A. S. No. 74 of 1997 remitting the matter to the trial Court for fresh disposal, the plaintiff has filed the present appeal. The appellant has filed O.S. 443/88 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Tirunelveli for a declaration that the plaint schedule property is a "Common Mutham" belonging to him and the defendants. He also prayed for mandatory injunction directing the respondents to remove the walls put up by them in the plaint schedule. The trial Court after trial decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff. The defendants filed A.S. 74/97 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli. The lower appellate Court after entertaining additional documents, remitted the matter to the trial Court for fresh disposal, against which the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed.

2. When A.S. 74/97 is pending before the Principal District Court, Tirunelveli, the appellants therein, respondents herein, filed I.A. 102/99 for reception of certain documents as additional evidence under Order 41, Rule 27. On the basis of the said documents, it is stated that the suit pro








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