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

1984 Supreme(Mad) 267

P.R.GOKULAKRISHNAN
P. Ramasamy – Appellant
Versus
V. Marimuthu and others – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S. Sethuratnan, for Petitioner
P. Pandhi, for Respondents.

Judgment :-

"The plaintiff in O.S. No. 1340 of 19 68 on the file of the district Munsif, Sankari,. is the petitioner herein. He purchased property with specified measurements from one Muniya Mooppao who had three brothers by name Ramaswami, Kava Mooppan and Atthanari. Since the issues of Ramaswami,. Kava Mooppan and Arthanari tried to interfere with the property purchased by the petitioner herein, he filed O.S.No. 1340/1968 for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants in the suit from in any way interfering with his possession and enjoyment of the suit property. In the alternative, he has asked for partition and allotment of l/4th share. The first defendant in the suit is the son of Ramaswami. Defendants 3 and 5 are the sons of Kava Mooppan. Defendants 6 to 9 are the sons of Arthanari. On 17th September, 1974 a preliminary decree for partition was passed and a Commissioner was appointed subsequently to divide the property. On 30tn October, 1976, final decree was passed allotting the red marked portion in the plan attached to the decree to the petitioner herein. Subsequent to that final decree the petitioner filed R.E.P. No.466 of 1979 for delivery of this red marked portion










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