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

2013 Supreme(Mad) 3014

R.S.RAMANATHAN
Mariyammal – Appellant
Versus
Dhandapani – Respondent


Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants:V. Subramaniam for S. Sathish Rajan, Advocates.

Judgment :

1. The plaintiffs 2 to 8 in O.S.No.492 of 1996, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Chidambaram, are the appellants herein. They filed the suit for declaration that the preliminary decree passed in O.S.No.56 of 1996, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Chidambaram, as null and void, not executable and not binding on the plaintiffs, for consequential injunction, restraining the defendants 1 and 2 from evicting the plaintiffs from the suit property, in any manner, and for mandatory injunction, directing the defendants to restore the electricity service connection to the plaintiffs' premises.

2. The Trial Court, in and by its judgment, dated 21.03.2006, dismissed the Suit. The Lower Appellate Court also confirmed the judgment and decree of the Trial Court. Aggrieved by the same, this Second Appeal is filed.

3. The case of the plaintiffs, as stated in the plaint, in short, is that the suit property belonged to one Ambalathadi. The plaintiffs are living in the suit property as tenants. The deceased first plaintiff entered into an oral agreement with one Appasamy Iyer, son of Vaithiyalingam, born through his first wife. As per that agreement, the first











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