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

2003 Supreme(Mad) 2079

P.SATHASIVAM
P. Subba Naicker – Appellant
Versus
Veluchamy Naicker – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R. Subramanian, Advocate for Petitioner. S. Kadarkarai (caveators), Advocate for Respondents.

Judgment :

1. Aggrieved by the order of the learned District Munsif dated 12.8.2003, made in I.A.No. 681 of 2003 in O.S.No. 124 of 2002, refusing to amend his plaint, the petitioner/plaintiff has filed the present Revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

2. The petitioner/plaintiff filed a civil suit in O.S.No. 124 of 2002 on the file of District Munsif, Koilpatti seeking a declaration that the suit second schedule property which is a path-way is common and for a consequential injunction restraining the respondents from transferring with his right to same as a path-way. The petitioner has also claimed that the suit third schedule property which is a open space was retained in common between them and the respondents and the same has to be used as a common area. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to light and air and to drain water from his house through the suit third schedule property and the channel situate thereon in to the street on the south. The respondents while admitting his right over the suit II schedule however, denied that the suit III schedule was kept as a common path-way. They claimed that the northern half belonged to him and the southern half



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