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

1998 Supreme(Mad) 1086

V.KANAGARAJ
Kathiresan – Appellant
Versus
Shanmugha Sundaram – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:V. Sitharanjandas, Advocate.

Judgment

1. Theabove civil revision petition is directed against the fair and decretal order dated 13.1.1998 made in I.A.No.1807 of 1997 in O.S.No.229 of 1995 by the Court of Additional District Munsif, Ramanathapuram, thereby dismissing the application filed under O.26, Rule 9 of C.P.C., thus declining to re-issue the commission already issued by the court below.

2. The petitioners are the defendants in the suit filed by the respondents for permanent injunction restraining the petitioners/defendants from in any manner interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit properties, the well located therein and further for a mandatory injunction to close the outlets in the southern wall of the petitioners door, and to remove the drainage channel put up therein by the petitioners/defendants.

3. Today when the above civil revision petition has been taken up for consideration, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would be present but on the other side neither the respondents nor their counsel on record appeared before this Court and hence hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the records placed before this Court, the following orders, a














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