G.RAJASURIA
Krishnan @ Kishtan – Appellant
Versus
Padmavathy – Respondent
1. This Second appeal is focussed by the plaintiff animadverting upon the judgment and decree dated 20.01.2011 passed in A.S.No.47 of 2006 by the Principal Sub-Judge, Puducherry, confirming the judgment and decree of the District Munsif, Puducherry in O.S.No.787 of 2003. The parties are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court.
2. Compendiously and concisely, the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this Second Appeal would run thus:
(a) The plaintiff filed the suit seeking the following reliefs:
"(i) To grant permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, servants, agents and any persons claiming any right through them from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property, by the plaintiff until he is duly evicted by due process of law; and
(ii) for costs." (extracted as such)
(b) D2 filed the written statement which was adopted by D1.
(c) Whereupon issues were framed by the trial Court.
(d) On the side of the plaintiff, he has not examined himself as a witness, however P.Ws.1 to 4 were examined and Exs.A1 and A18 were marked. The second defendant-Kum
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.