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

1996 Supreme(Mad) 217

P.SATHASIVAM
C. Mayam Perumal Konar and Others – Appellant
Versus
Thangammal – Respondent


Advocates:
Mrs. Chitra Sampath and T.R. Rajagopalan, for Appellants. S.Parthasarathi, for Respondent.

Judgment :

Defendants 2 to 5 in O.S. No.637 of 1977 on the file of District Munsif, Karur, are the appellants in the second appeal. The respondent herein filed the suit O.S. No.637 of 1977 before the said court for declaration of his right, title and interest over the suit property and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from in any manner doing anything and raising construction and for mandatory injunction directing the defendants to remove the construction on the disputed property within the time fixed by the court.

2. The averments in the plaint are as follows: The vacant site of the suit ‘A’ schedule property originally belonged to one Chinnappa Konar, who is the father of defendants 1 and 2 and one Srinivasa Konar, who is the husband of the plaintiff. One Krishna Konar and his son have partitioned their joint family properties including the suit ‘A’ schedule property on 30.3.1938 under a registered partition deed. In the partition, the western half of the vacant site of ‘A’ schedule property was allotted to the said Srinivasa Konar and the eastern half of the vacant site of ‘A’ schedule property was allotted to the said Chinnappa Konar, who is father of defend




















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