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

2016 Supreme(Mad) 3943

N.SATHISH KUMAR
S. Nirmala – Appellant
Versus
Kanniammal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Plaintiff :Mr. M. Balasubramanian, Advocate
For the Defendants :Mr. C.P. Sivamohan, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

N. Sathish Kumar, J.

The suit is filed for recovery of possession and permanent injunction restraining the defendants from in any way changing the nature and character of the suit property.

2. The brief facts of the case of the plaintiff are as follows:

An extent of 4 ground and 18 sq.ft of land were originally purchased by one P. Chakrapani Reddiar, vide registered sale deed dated 17.3.1966. The said P. Chakrapani Reddiar, who is none other than the father-in-law of the plaintiff, was in possession and enjoyment of the suit property from the date of purchase and also obtained patta in his favour. The suit property consists of two items. Item No.1 consists of 3 grounds and item No.2 consists of 1 ground and 18 sq.ft. The aforesaid Chakrapani Reddiar appointed one Ramasamy as a watchman in the year 1978 and permitted him to stay in the watchman shed, which was constructed in item No.2 of the suit property. The said Chakrapani Reddiar died intestate in the year 1979 leaving behind his only son, Sathyanarayanan, and his wife, C. Shyamalavalli as his legal heirs. The said








































































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