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

1994 Supreme(Mad) 293

KANAKARAJ
A. Munuswami – Appellant
Versus
R. Sethuraman – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:K.T. Palpandian, R. Alagar, A. Sivaji, Advocates.

Judgment :-

In both the above second appeals, one A. Munuswami is the appellant and one R. Sethuraman is the sole respondent. Two suits were filed on the file of the II Additional Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirapalli, one by the respondent namely, O.S. No. 93 of 1982 and the other by the appellant namely, O.S. 213 of 1982. O.S. No. 93 of 1982 is for a declaration that the respondent is the owner of the suit property and for recovery of possession of the same from the appellant. There was also a claim for rent or damages for use and occupation. O. S. No. 213 of 1982 is for a permanent injunction to restrain the respondent from interfering with the appellant's possession of the very same property. For the purpose of convenience I will refer to the parties Munuswami as the appellant and Sethuraman as the respondent. The second appeals have been argued at length and I am of the opinion that it will be convenient to refer to the pleadings and the documents filed in the case before referring to the judgments of the Courts below as well as the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties.

2.The respondent's case in O. S. No. 93 of 1982 is as follows:-

An extent of 2 acres comprised in T.S. No.



























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