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

1997 Supreme(Mad) 32

P.SATHASIVAM
Muthammal – Appellant
Versus
Thamburati and others – Respondent


Advocates:
T.M.Hariharan, for Petitioner. Peppin Fernando, for Respondents.

Judgment :

Plaintiff in O.S. No.559 of 1990 on the file of District Munsif, Tenkasi, aggrieved against the order passed in I.A. No.496 of 1995 has filed the present revision before this Court.

2. The petitioner herein has originally filed O.S. No.559 of 1990 on the file of District Munsif, Tenkasi, for declaration and permanent injunction in respect of the suit property against the defendants. The respondents/ defendants filed a written statement disputing the various averments.

3. In the affidavit filed in support of I.A. No.496 of 1995, the petitioner herein contended that pending suit he has also filed I.A. No. 1465 of 1990 under O.39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C., and also obtained interim in- junction in the said application. According to her, when the injunction was in force, the defendants have constructed stair-case and toilet in the first schedule of the property and also provided door and window on the plaintiff’s site. This has been strengthened by the report of the Commissioner, who is categorical terms confirmed that the defendants have put up new construction in the subject-matter of the property. In those circumstance, the plaintiff sought for an amendment to incorporate 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