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

1999 Supreme(Mad) 2667

ANNA CHANDY
Parameswara Iyer – Appellant
Versus
Mrithunjaya Panicker – Respondent


Advocates:
G. Viswanatha Iyer, for Appellant.
T.K. Narayana Pillai and N. Govindan Nair, for Respondent.

Judgment.-This appeal filed by the complainant against the acquittal of the accused in a case charge-sheeted by the police was allowed to be treated as a revision on the motion of the complainant.

The charge against the accused was that they formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object of taking forcible possession of a property in the complainant’s possession and put up a shed. Accused 2 and 7 pleaded that they were in possession of the property and had filed a suit for establishing their claims. The other accused are their friends and associates.

The complainant got delivery of the property through Court as early as 1958 in execution of the decree in O.S. No. 369 of 1952. Subsequent to the delivery the defendants in that case trespassed into the buildings in the property and that necessitated another suit for demolising the buildings at his cost and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing into the property. Pending suit the property was managed by a Receiver appointed by the Court. That suit was also decreed and in pursuance of the decree the Receiver surrendered possession of the property to the complainant and the buildings wer








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