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

2000 Supreme(Mad) 776

K.SAMPATH
Arulmigu Mariamman Koil – Appellant
Versus
David Mariadoss – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G. Rajan, Advocate for Appellants.
Mr. V. Balasubramanian for Mr.S. Sampathkumar, Advocate for Respondents.

Judgment :

1. The plaintiffs in O.S.No.240 of 1983 on the file of the District Munsif, Tiruvarur, are the appellants in the second appeal. The suit was filed for recovery of possession of an extent of 8 cents out of 96 cents in R.S. No. 199/7 in Pattudaiyaviruppu Village, Aikudi Vattam, Kodavasal Taluk, Tiruvarur Munsif, on the following averments: The plaintiff is a public temple under the control of the Tamil Nadu H.R. & C.E. Department and it is represented by the trustee appointed by the Deputy Commissioner, Nagai, of the H.R. & C.E. Department. The suit property belongs to the plaintiff temple. The property is in Patta No.321 and R.S.No. 199/7 and was in the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff temple. About 10 years prior to the suit, the first defendant entered into the suit property and started enjoying by raising dry crops. Inspite of several requests and demands made by the trustee, the first defendant did not give up the property. The plaintiff caused a notice to be issued on 6.6.1983 to the first defendant. Though he received it, he did not send any reply. The first defendant was liable to pay at the rate of Rs.3 per month. There was a tamarind tree also which would










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