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

1991 Supreme(Mad) 560

M.SRINIVASAN
Raju Naicker – Appellant
Versus
Ananthakrishna Naicker and others – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:V.Narayanaswami, for Appellant. T.V.Ramanujam, for Respondents.

Judgment :-

The plaintiff is the appellant. He filed the suit for a declaration of his right easement through the channel marked as A, B, C, D, E in the plaint plan and as described the Schedule to the plaint, for an injunction retraining the defendants from interfering the enjoyment and for a mandatory injunction directing the defendants to restore the schedule channel shown as A, B, E, F in the plaint plan. The case of the plaintiff is that purchased an extent of 2 acres and 67 cents in S.Nos.246/1 and 248/4 from Tiripurasundari Ammal for Rs.1,000 under the registered sale deed dated 4.6.1959. It is also his case he purchased another extent of 49 cents to the south of the said 2 acres and 67 cents and thus he was entitled to an extent of 3 acres and 15 cents in that area. According to under the sale deed in his favour, he was given right to take water from the maduvu on north through a channel to the east of the land purchased by him as described as A, B, in the plan. He said that he was enjoying the channel ever since his purchase and it was easement by grant as well as necessity. His further case is that on account misunderstanding with defendants, who are father and sons, are





















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