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

2007 Supreme(Mad) 464

J.A.K.SAMPATHKUMAR
Palaniswamy – Appellant
Versus
Muthuswamy Goundar – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant :M.V. Krishnan, Advocate. For the Respondent: --

Judgment :

Appeal filed under Section 96 C.P.C. against the judgment and decree, dated 30.04.1990 made in O.S.No.130 of 1983 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Dharapuram.

This appeal is against the judgment and decree dated 30.04.1990 in O.S.No.130 of 1983 on the file of Sub-Court, Dharapuram in and by which, the learned Subordinate Judge after analysing the evidence found that the plaintiff is not entitled to the suit claim and accordingly dismissed the suit.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed in the suit.

3. The plaintiff states as follows:

The suit property is situated in Moolanur Village. The plaintiff married one Nachammal and a female child was born out of the wedlock. The child was aged 8 years at the time of filing of the suit. Due to misunderstanding, the plaintiff and his wife Nachammal are living separately. The minor child Vijyalakshmi is living with her mother, Nachammal.

Because of separation, the wife of the plaintiff was giving trouble to the plaintiff. Taking advantage of this situation, the defendant being a close relative of the plaintiff advised the plaintiff to execute the sale deed in respect of the disputed property in hi




























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