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

1997 Supreme(Mad) 296

S.S.SUBRAMANI
M. Ramalingam – Appellant
Versus
N. Thangavelu – Respondent


Advocates:
S. Gopalaratnam, for Appellant. V.K. Vijayaraghavan, for Respondent.

Judgment :

Defendant in O.S. No.369 of 1992, on the file of Subordinate Judge’s Court, Thanjavur, is the appellant. Suit filed by the plaintiff is one for declaration of title, recovery of possession and for mandatory injunction directing the defendant to remove all Constructions, pipes and other obstructions in the suit property, and for consequential reliefs.

.2. The material averments in the plaint are as follows:

.The schedule property is part of Resurvey No.342/ 2-A Item 38, which, according to the plaintiff is his ancestral property. He obtained the same through a final decree passed in that case. He was allotted 40 cents. Out of the 40 cents, portions have been sold, and the remaining portion is described in the plaint. It is his case that the plaintiff is the absolute owner. It is further averred that during the temporary absence of the plaintiff on 9. 1992, defendant removed the fence of the plaintiff towards western side and occupied portion of his property and put up construction. The action of the defendant is unauthorised. The suit was, therefore, laid for declaration of title and other reliefs mentioned above.

3. In the written statement, the title of the plaintiff

































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