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

1998 Supreme(Mad) 775

A.RAMAMURTHI
Pakkiya Konar, and another – Appellant
Versus
Kunjammal – Respondent


Advocates:
Mr.Ramasubramanian for M\s. Ram and Ram, Advocate for Petitioners.

Judgment :

1. The petitioneraccused have preferred the revision, challenging, the conviction and sentence imposed on them in C.A.No. 193 of 1993 on the file of the II Additional Session Judge, Tiruchirapalli confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the judicial Magistrate, Jayakondam in C.C.No. 164 of 1992 in which, the petitioners were found guilty under section 427, IPC and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.500, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

The respondent aged about 70 years filed a private complaint alleging that the petitioners have committed an offence under section 427 IPC. The complainant is owning landed property in survey No.285 in Malsinthamani Village. Adjacent to this land, about one acre of land belonged to one Velayutham Chettair and it was also in the enjoyment of the complaint and her husband for a period of 15 years. There was a north south fence dividing these properties for the last 50 years. On the east and north of the fence, there are fruit bearing trees. On 4. 92 the petitioners alleging that they have purchased the land from the Chettiar removed the fence to a dista








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