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

2008 Supreme(Mad) 3383

A.C.ARUMUGAPERUMAL ADITYAN
Rajalakshmi (Deceased) & Another – Appellant
Versus
Ramadoss – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :S. Sounthar, Advocate.
For the Respondent:S. Viswanathan, Advocate.

Judgment :-

1. This second appeal has been directed against the decree and judgment in A.S.No.79 of 1995 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Mayiladuthurai, which had arisen out of the decree and judgment in O.S.No.29 of 1986 on the file of the Court of District Munsif, Sirkali. The plaintiff, who had succeed before the trial Court and got a decree for bare injunction, has lost the same in the first appeal A.S.No.79 of 1994 preferred by the defendant, has filed this second appeal. Pending second appeal, the appellant / sole plaintiff died and her son has been impleaded as LR of the deceased plaintiff.

2.The short facts of the plaint relevant for the purpose of deciding this second appeal are as follows:-

The plaint schedule property is a vacant site belonging to the plaintiffs husband Kannuswamy Chettiar, who had purchased the same under a sale deed dated 1. 1935 and he was in possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property till his death. Subsequent to his death his wife / plaintiff and their children were in continuous possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property as legal heirs of deceased Kannuswamy Chettiar. Except the plaintiff and her children no















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