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

2007 Supreme(Mad) 3653

P.JYOTHIMANI
Angammal & Another – Appellant
Versus
C. Sellamuthu & Another – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioners:V.S. Kesavan, Advocate. For the Respondents:
V. Ayyathurai, Advocate.

Judgment :-

The plaintiffs in the suit are the revision petitioners. The revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order of the learned trial Judge in dismissing the application filed by the plaintiffs in I.A.No.1005 of 2006 under Order VI, Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the plaint.

.2. The plaintiffs filed the suit in O.S.No.98 of 2005 on the file of the First Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode for declaration that the decree passed in O.S.No.311 of 1998 on the file of Sub Court, Erode is void and not binding the share of Chennimalai Gounder in the suit properties and for injunction restraining the defendants from in any manner either alienating or encumbering the suit properties and for preliminary decree for partition dividing the suit properties into six equal shares and to allot one such share to each of the plaintiffs.

3. According to the plaintiffs, the suit properties are agricultural properties and A-schedule properties are the joint family properties of late V.Chennimalai Gounder allotted to him under partition deed dated 17. 1960 executed between himself and other co-sharers. B-schedule property is a house property inherited by Chenn




































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