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

2011 Supreme(Mad) 4558

VINOD K.SHARMA
Ist Petitioner – Appellant
Versus
Ist Respondent – Respondent


Judgment :-

VINOD K. SHARMA, J.

1. The plaintiff / applicant has filed a suit for partition, for separate possession of ½ share in the suit schedule property.

2. The case of the plaintiff is that defendant no.1 has transferred a part of property exceeding her share in favour of defendant no.2, who has further mortgaged the property to defendant no.3. The plaintiff has also prayed for grant of mense profit against defendant no.1 for use and occupation of share of property, belonging to the plaintiff / applicant.

3. Along with the suit, the plaintiff / applicant has filed this application for injunction, restraining defendants / respondents from in any way dealing with the property or altering the status of the property shown in the Schedule-B properties with the application.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant referred to Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, to contend that the applicant / plaintiff is entitled to injunction against alienation of property, pending suit, except with the permission of this Court.

5. Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act reads as under:

"52. Transfer of property pending suit relating thereto

During the pendency in any Court having





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