Back
S.VIMALA
R. Dayalan – Appellant
Versus
Nagarathnam – Respondent
The second appeal has been filed challenging the judgment of the Subordinate Judge, Hosur, rendered in A.S.No.133 of 1996, dated 05.11.1997, confirming the decree and judgment of the Court of District Munsif, Hosur, made in O.S.No.418 of 1985, dated 22.08.1994.
2. The suit in O.S.No.418 of 1985 has been filed for the relief of declaration and injunction. The declaration is sought for in respect of two items of the suit property, namely, an extent of 4.5 acres in R.S.No.682 and an extent of 45 cents in R.S.No.683 at Kannathur Village, Hosur Taluk, totalling an extent of 4.92 acres. The plaintiff died during the pendency of the suit and plaintiffs 2 to 9 are added as legal representatives of the deceased first plaintiff.
3. The plaintiff claimed title based upon the settlement deed, dated 21.09.1976. The defendants disputed the title of the plaintiff on the ground that the settlement deed was not valid on three grounds, (i) the settlement deed was not accepted and acted upon; (ii) settlement deed was a nominal document and (iii) the settlement deed had been cancelled by the execution of cancellation deed by the executant himself.
4. The trial court has framed the followi
None of the listed cases explicitly indicate that they have been overruled, reversed, or otherwise treated as bad law based solely on the provided descriptions. There are no keywords such as "overruled," "reversed," "disapproved," or similar language in the summaries that suggest these cases have been invalidated or negatively treated in subsequent judgments.
Followed / Confirmed Treatment:
R. Kumarasamy Kounder VS V. Ezhumalai Kounder - 1996 0 Supreme(Mad) 27: A gift is complete and irrevocable once accepted by the donee. This case establishes a fundamental principle regarding the completion of a gift, which is likely to be followed in subsequent cases dealing with gift validity.
Kannappan VS Pargunan and others - 1999 0 Supreme(Mad) 848: Mere attestation without knowledge of contents does not amount to estoppel, and even awareness does not grant rights over property. This case sets a specific standard regarding attestation and estoppel, which is generally accepted and likely followed.
Jayalakshmi and others VS Kaliaperumal - 1984 0 Supreme(Mad) 399: Revocation of a deed of gift. The treatment of revocation is a standard legal principle, and unless specified otherwise, such cases are typically followed.
Kamalammal (dead) & Others VS Girija & Others - 2009 0 Supreme(Mad) 4845: The invalidity of cancellation of a gift settlement deed if the settlor had no power of revocation. This case clarifies the limits of revocation rights, a principle that is generally upheld and followed.
Distinguished / Clarified Treatment:
J. Kuppuswami Mudali and Others VS Mahalingam - 1996 0 Supreme(Mad) 756: Delivery of possession settled by a settlement deed. The description suggests a straightforward legal principle; unless there is specific subsequent case law challenging it, it likely remains distinguished from other issues.
S. Ganesan VS Bharathirajan - 2009 0 Supreme(Mad) 1936: Adverse possession cannot be claimed when ownership based on title is pleaded, and mere possession does not lead to adverse possession. This is a well-established legal principle, probably consistently distinguished from cases where adverse possession is claimed without proper basis.
Kasi Ammal VS Vellai Gounder - 1980 0 Supreme(Mad) 74: Essentials for a valid gift. As a foundational principle, this case likely serves as a standard reference point rather than being overruled or reversed.
All cases appear to be based on well-established legal principles or standard procedural rules, and there are no explicit indications of treatment such as overruling or reversal. However, without access to subsequent case law or judicial commentary, the treatment of these cases could be subject to change or reinterpretation. Therefore, their treatment remains assumed to be consistent with the principles summarized unless further case law indicates otherwise.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
