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

1996 Supreme(Mad) 756

P.SATHASIVAM
J. Kuppuswami Mudali and Others – Appellant
Versus
Mahalingam – Respondent


Advocates:
J. Venugopal, for Appellants S.D.Balaji, for Respondent.

Judgment :

The defendants in O.S.No.472 of 1979 on the file of District Munsif’s Court, Tiruttani are the appellants in the above second appeal. The respondent, Plaintiff filed the said suit for declaration and for permanent injunction or in the alternative recovery of possession of the plaintiff’s property.

2. The case of the plaintiff as found in the plaint are briefly narrated hereunder: One Govinda Mudali was the absolute owner of the suit property. He settled the suit property in favour of one Papammal, the vendor of the plaintiff under the registered settlement deed dated 15. 1970, and she has also accepted the same. The plaintiff purchased the suit property from the said Pappammal under a registered sale deed 4. 1979 for Rs.3,000. Since the vendor of the plaintiff was in possession and enjoyment of the suit property, sold the same to the plaintiff, they have perfected their title to the suit property by adverse possession also. The defendants have no right, title or interest in the suit property, attempted to trespass in the suit property and interfered in his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same, which necessitated the plaintiff to file the present suit.

3. The al




















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