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

2001 Supreme(Mad) 1017

P.SATHASIVAM
P. Palani – Appellant
Versus
P. Saminatha Padayachi and others – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mrs.Hema Sampath, for Petitioner.
R.Muralidharan, for Respondents.

Judgment :

The civil revision petition is filed against the order of the learned District Munsif, Cuddalore dated 13.2.2001 made in O.S.No.454 of 1998.

2. The petitioner/plaintiff filed a civil suit in O.S.No.454 of 1998 before the District Munsif Court, Cuddalore against the respondents herein/defendants for declaring his right to easement to let out water for a width of 2 feet beyond the line CF in the plaint plan and for mandatory injunction directing the defendants to remove the wall constructed by them 2 1/2” away of the western side of CP wall to a height of 15 feet.

3. Thefirst defendant filed a written statement disputing various averments made by the plaintiff.

4. During the trial, when P.W.1 was examined on the side of the plaintiff, a partition arrangement dated 21.6.1982 was sought to be marked. The said move was objected by the defendants on the ground that it is an unregistered document and the same cannot be marked. However, it is contended on the side of the plaintiff that though it is an unregistered document, the same can be marked for a collateral purpose. The learned District Munsif, after holding that by the said partition arrangement, the plaintiff wants to es










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