GOVINDA MENON, RAMASWAMI GOUNDER
Sankaranarayana Pillai – Appellant
Versus
Kandasamia Pillai – Respondent
Issue 6. Whether the suit is not properly valued and correct court-fee not paid ?
Issue 7. Whether this Court has no jurisdiction to try the suit?
The suit was filed by the plaintiff respondent for possession of his 1/6th share in the plaint 1 and 2 schedule lands including the trees and the well on them. The plaintiff’s mother and guardian had executed two sale-deeds in respect of the plaint schedule properties. Exhibit B-1 dated 8th January, 1938, was a registered sale-deed for Rs. 750 executed by the plaintiff’s mother, Pachaivadivammal, as natural guardian of the plaintiff, in favour of the 1st defendant and others. Exhibit B-2 was sale-deed executed on the same day, by the same lady as natural guardian of the plaintiff for Rs.750 in favour of the 2nd defendant. Within 3 years of his attaining majority, the plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of possession of his 1/6th share in the plaint schedule properties from the defendants, for mesne profi
Veeraraghavalu v. Sreeramulu A.I.R. 1928 Mad. 816
Ramaswami v. Kunjammal : [1950] 1 M.L.J. 408
Kuppuswami Goundan v. Mari Goundan : [1943] 1 M.L.J. 249
Doraiswami v. Thangavelu A.I.R. 1929 Mad. 668
Vaduganatha Pillai v. Srinivasa Raghava Iyengar : [1950] 2 M.L.J. 378
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.