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

2016 Supreme(Mad) 1693

K.KALYANA SUNDARAM
S. Saibullahkhan – Appellant
Versus
Hairunisha Beevi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. V. Sitharanjandas.
For the Respondent: Mr. J. Barathan.

ORDER :

1. Heard Mr.V.Sitharanjandas, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.J.Barathan, learned Counsel appearing for the first respondent.

2. This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Ramanathapuram in I.A.No.259 of 2016 in O.S.No.26 of 2008. The third defendant in the suit is the petitioner in this Civil Revision Petition.

3. Facts in brief:

The first respondent had instituted the suit on 09.04.2008 against the respondents 2 and 3 herein for declaration and permanent injunction. At the time of institution of the suit, the suit property was valued for a sum of Rs.2,70,000/- and a sum of Rs.10,125/- was paid for declaratory relief and a sum of Rs.75.50/- was paid for bare injunction. The petitioner purchased the property on 29.09.2014 under a registered sale deed in Document No.4692/2014 for a sum of Rs.14,80,000/-.

4. The first respondent/plaintiff filed an application in I.A.No.91 of 2016 seeking amendment of the prayer for recovery of possession and after the amendment was allowed, the first respondent paid a sum of Rs.20,250/- towards the court fee valuing the suit property at Rs.2,70,000/-.

5. The petitioner fi














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