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

2007 Supreme(Mad) 3609

A.KULASEKARAN
K. M. A. Wahab & Others – Appellant
Versus
Eswaran & Another – Respondent


For the Petitioners:M. Baskar, Advocate. For the Respondents:P.T. Asha, Mukunth, Sarvabhuman Associates, Advocates.

Judgment :-

1. The plaintiffs are revision petitioners herein, who filed the Suit for specific performance in O.S. No.309 of 2005 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions, Fast Track Court No.1, Coimbatore. The first respondent/defendant has filed

I.A. No.697 of 2006 for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner, which was allowed. Hence the present Revision.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the Suit is one for specific performance. The respondent claims that he is in possession of the suit property. To that effect, he filed an affidavit in support of I.A. No.697 of 2006, wherein it is alleged, "I further submit that I was in actual and physical possession of the suit property cultivating cholam in the suit property. There was no demarcating stones, ditches and roads as stated by the respondents/plaintiffs in the suit property. The respondents/plaintiffs have not formed any layout in the suit property. Under such circumstances, it is deemed necessary to note down the physical features of the suit property and take photographs with the help of photographer and measure it with the help of the surveyor".

3. Pointing out the said statement



















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