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

2009 Supreme(Mad) 1268

G.RAJASURIA
Balamani & Another – Appellant
Versus
S. Balasundaram – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellants:N. Manokaran, Advocate.
For the Respondent:P. Valliappan, Advocate.

Judgment

This second appeal is focused by the plaintiffs, animadverting upon the judgment and decree dated 05.07.2006 passed by the Principal District Judge, Erode, in A.S. No. 92 of 2005, reversing the judgment and decree dated 111. 2005 passed by the Subordinate Judge, Bhavani, in O.S. No. 9 of 2003. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status before the trial Court.

2. A summation and summarization of the relevant facts, which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this second appeal, would run thus:

The appellants/plaintiffs filed the suit O.S. No. 9 of 2003 as against the defendant, seeking the following relief:

"To pass a preliminary decree to dividing the suit property into 2 equal share and allot one half to the plaintiffs with reference to good and bad soil by metes and bounds and put the plaintiffs in separate possession over the same."

(extracted as such)

The defendant entered appearance and filed the written statement resisting the suit.

3. The trial Court framed the relevant issues. During trial, the second plaintiff examined himself as P.W.1 along with one Eswaran as P.W.2 and Exs. A1 and A












































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