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

1999 Supreme(Mad) 1190

E.PADMANABHAN
Nalluswamy Reddiar – Appellant
Versus
Marammal and Others – Respondent


Advocates:
Mr.M.V.Krishnan, Advocate for Appellant. Mr.M.N.Muthukumaran, Advocate for Respondents.

Judgment :

1. Second defendant in O.S. No. 73 of 1983 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Manapparai, who has succeeded before the trial Court and lost before the first appellate Court is the appellant in this second appeal.

2. Heard Mr.M.V.Krishnan, for the appellant and Mr .M.N.Muthukumaran, for Mr.M.N.Padmanabhan, Senior counsel for the respondents 1 to 5.

.3. At the time of admission, the following substantial question of law was framed by this Court:

.WHETHER THE FINDINGS OF THE LOWER APPELLATE COURT THAT THE APPELLANT-SECOND DEFENDANT IS NOT A HOLDER IN DUE COURSE WITHOUT A SPECIFIC PLEADING TO THAT EFFECT COULD BE SUSTAINED.

4. For convenience, the parties will be referred to as arrayed before the trial court.

5. The plaintiffs 1 to 3 instituted the suit in O.S. No. 73 of 1983 against the defendants 1 and 2 seeking the relief of specific performance of an agreement to sell and for permanent injunction for bearing the defendants from interfering with their possession of the suit property. The first plaintiff died pending suit and plaintiffs 4 to 6, who are the children of the first plaintiff, was impleaded apart from the second plaintiff being recorded as also 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