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

2015 Supreme(Mad) 562

P.R.SHIVAKUMAR
Chitra – Appellant
Versus
Kannan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:R. Bharanidharan, Advocate.
For the Respondent:P. Valliappan, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

P.R. SHIVAKUMAR, J.

1. This Revision has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India questioning the legality of the order dated 09.11.2010 made by the trial Judge, namely, the learned 3rd Additional District Munsif, Kallakurichi, in I.A. No. 2245 of 2010 in O.S. No. 40 of 2008 on the file of the said Court.

2. The petitioner herein is the plaintiff in the above said suit and the respondent herein is the sole defendant in the said suit. The suit came to be filed by the revision petitioner for a bare perpetual injunction not to interfere with her peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property (immovable property) described in the plaint schedule. The claim was based on the plaint averment that she purchased the property from the rightful owner by a sale deed dated 21.08.2002 and that ever since the purchase, she had been in possession and enjoyment of the same. No averment was found incorporated in the plaint indicating that the title of the plaintiff was in dispute. Hence, the suit was valued under Section 27(c) of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act 1955.

3. The respondent herein/sole defendant, who entered appearance after receiving summon
















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