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

2017 Supreme(Mad) 2394

S.VAIDYANATHAN
Jegadammal (died), Kuppammal – Appellant
Versus
Munusamy – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. T.S. Kannaiyan

JUDGMENT :

The unsuccessful plaintiffs before both the Courts below, are the appellants herein. They challenge the judgment and decree of the trial Court in O.S.No.39 of 1991 in dismissing the suit, which had been confirmed by the lower appellate Court in A.S.No.39 of 1997.

2. It is the case of the appellants/plaintiffs that the first plaintiff is the wife of Thanja Gounder and the other two appellants are the daughters of the first plaintiff. The first and second defendants are the son and another daughter born to the first plaintiff and Thanja Gounder. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the entire properties belong to Thanja Gounder and they are self-acquired properties, and the said Thanja Gounder died intestate leaving behind the heirs, who are all parties in the suit and that they are entitled to equal shares in the property. As the defendants did not agree to the request of the plaintiffs, claiming 3/5 share in the plaint schedule property, after issuance of lawyer's notice, dated 19.11.1990, the plaintiffs have approached the trial Court for the relief of partition and allotment of respective shares.

3. The contesting first defendant contended before the Civil Court that his










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