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

2002 Supreme(Mad) 26

A.S.VENKATACHALA MOORTHY
V. R. Gopalakrishnan – Appellant
Versus
Andiammal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Miss. Lathamaheswari, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr.N. Thaigarajan, Advocate for Respondents.

Judgment :

1. The 2nd defendant in O.S. No.820 of 1995 on the file of the I Additional District Munsif, Salem is the petitioner herein. The above Revision has been filed against the Order dismissing I.A. No.709 of 2000 filed under Section 151, C.P.C to try issue No.4 ie.,

" Whether the plaintiff has valued suit properly and paid correct court fees as a preliminary issue ".

2. The first respondent/plaintiff filed O.S. No.828 of 1995 against the 2nd respondent/first defendant and the petitioner herein, praying the court to grant a decree setting aside the sale deed dated 18.3.1993 executed by the plaintiff to the 1st defendant as vitiated by fraud, cheating and fraudulent misrepresentation and not valid in law and to declare the plaintiff’s title to the suit property. The plaintiff also sought for a decree for consequential permanent injunction restraining the defendants interfering with the plaintiff’s possession and enjoyment of the suit property.

3. Briefly, it is the case of the plaintiff that the suit property is the ancestral property and that she has been in possession and enjoyment of the same in her own right and that the first defendant, a neighbour, took advantage of the



































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