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

2005 Supreme(Mad) 665

A.KULASEKARAN
Kandasamy – Appellant
Versus
Savithri (died) – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P. Valliappan for M/s. M.S. Krishnan, S. Parthasarathy and R. Sekhar, for Appellants.
V. Radhakrishnan, for Respondents.

Judgment :

1. Thedefendants are the appellants herein. The first respondent herein/plaintiff had filed a suit in O.S.No.159 of 1982 before the District Munsif Court, Tiruchengode, for declaration and injunction on 27.2.1982. On 8.10.1990, the first respondent herein/plaintiff had also filed an amendment petition seeking amendment of interim injunction into one as mandatory injunction. The said amendment petition was allowed by the trial Court which was not challenged by the appellants herein.

2. The trial Court has decreed the suit and granted declaration as prayed for by the first respondent herein/plaintiff, however, it refused to grant mandatory injunction for removal of staircase and window sunshades, but granted injunction restraining the appellants herein from interfering into the property of the plaintiff for which declaration is granted. The plaintiff had filed an appeal challenging to the extent of refusal to grant mandatory injunction in A.S.No.54 of 1991 before the Sub Court, Sankari, which was allowed. Hence, the second appeal.

3. It is the case of the appellants that the staircase and window sunshades were constructed as early as 1973. But, the same was disputed by the


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