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

1988 Supreme(Mad) 1

RATNAM
Periyanayagam – Appellant
Versus
Rajendran – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Ratnam, J.

1. These second appeals have been preferred by Periyanayagam, who figured as second defendant in O.S. No. 290 of 1978, District Munsif's Court, Cuddalore, and the plaintiff in O.S. No. 97 of 1977 before the same Court. S.A. No. 1668 of 1980 arises out of O.S. No. 290 of 1978 wherein the reliefs of declaration of title and recovery of possession with reference to two items of properties had been prayed for by respondents 1 and 2 therein. S.A. No. 1669 of 1980 arises out of O.S. No. 97 of 1977 instituted by the second defendant in O.S. No. 290 of 1978 with reference to one out of two items forming the subject matter of O.S. No. 290 of 1978, praying for the relief of permanent injunction. The two items of properties forming the subject-matter of these second appeals are of an extent of 1.06 acres in survey No. 1087/1 and western 85 cents out of a total extent of 2.85 acres in survey No. 1082/6 in the hamlet of Vekakollai. The third respondent in S.A. No. 1668 of 1980, namely, Pachamuthu is the father of respondents 1 and 2 therein and first respondent in S.A. No. 1669 of 1980. Under Ex. A-1 dated 27.7.1966, Pachamuthu, acting as the guardian of this minor sons Rajend
















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