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

1999 Supreme(Mad) 616

S.S.SUBRAMANI
Balamani – Appellant
Versus
Kailasam Konar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:S. Desikan, Advocate.
For the Respondent:P. Rajagopal, Advocate.

Judgment :-

1. Plaintiff in O.S.No.406 of 1993 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Arupukottai is the revision petitioner Suit filed by him was for declaration of title and recovery of possession. The plaintiff alleged that on 25.5.1947, there was a panchayat and a partition was effected and the same was recorded in a note book and all the sharers have also affixed their signature in that document. The plaintiff properties were allotted to one of the sharers Karuppiah Konar and on his death, the property devolved on his widow Vellammal and the plaintiff. It is also alleged that the Vellammal also died and the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the property. The defendants are now interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the property wherein the plaintiff has put up a construction. The suit was therefore, filed for declaration and consequential reliefs.

2. The defendant has filed a written statement.

3. After suggesting issues, parties went on trial when P.W.1 was being examined, a document was marked as Ex.A-1. At the time of marking the document, there was no objection. It is seen on the next day, an application was filed on behalf of the defendants side as I.A. was ea




























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