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

1996 Supreme(Mad) 14

RAJU
Thirumangai Naidu – Appellant
Versus
R. Srinivasan and Others – Respondent


Advocates:
M.N.Sundararajan, for Appellant. V.Narayanaswami, for N.Raja, for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.

Judgment :

The appellant in the above second appeal is the defendant in O.S. No.3024 of 1979, on the file of the District Munsif’s Court, Cuddalore and the respondents are the heirs and successors in interest of late Kamalammal, wife of Late V.R. Radhakrishna Reddiar and who was also the plaintiff in O.S. No.3024 of 1979.

.2. The plaintiff’ s husband, Radhakrishna Reddiar was said to have purchased the suit property from one Thillaikannu Ammal, under a registered sale deed dated 29. 1964 for a sum of Rs.3,000. After his purchase, he was claimed to have demolished the building that was on the south side and built superstructure at a cost of Rs.50,000 in the year 1965. The suit property was said to have originally belonged to one Krishnasami Padayachi, the grand-father of P. W.1 Venugopal. Thillaikannu Ammal was the wife of Krishnasami Padayachi. In a suit filed in O.S. No.235 of 1945 by Venugopal, a compromise decree was said to have been passed as entered into between the said Venugopal and Thillaikannu Ammal, as per which Thillaikannu Ammal should enjoy the property till her life time without any power of alienation and after her P.W. 1 Venugopal should take it absolutely. The com








































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