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

2010 Supreme(Mad) 54

A.SELVAM
Saral Saroja – Appellant
Versus
Simson – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :A. Arumugam, Advocate.
For the Respondent:T. S. R. Venkatramana, Advocate.

Judgment :

This second appeal has been directed against the concurrent Judgments passed in Original Suit No.7 of 1990 by the District Munsif Court, Ambasamudram and in Appeal Suit No.7 of 1994 by the Sub Court, Ambasamudram.

2. The respondent herein as plaintiff has instituted Original Suit No.7 of 1990 on the file of the trial Court for the reliefs of declaration, recovery of possession and also for future mesne profits, wherein the present appellant has been shown as sole defendant.

.3. It is averred in the plaint that the suit property is originally belonged to the father of the plaintiff by name Kovil Pichai Nadar and he enjoyed the same uninterruptedly for more than a statutory period. The plaintiff has purchased the suit property under a registered sale deed dated 212. 1988. After purchase, the plaintiff has asked the defendant to vacate the suit property. But the defendant has agreed to enjoy the suit property on a monthly rental of Rs.75/- and also given assurance to vacate the suit property within six months. The defendant has paid monthly rent upto April 1989 and thereafter she failed to pay monthly rent. The plaintiff has issued a legal notice on 110. 1989 to the defend



















































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