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

2017 Supreme(Mad) 3313

T.RAVINDRAN
Selvaraj – Appellant
Versus
Arumugham – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :V.J. Latha, Advocate.
For the Respondent:V. Srimathi, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

1. Challenge in this second appeal is made to the judgment and decree dated 31.10.2000 passed in A.S.No.34 of 1998, on the file of the Additional District Court, Villupuram, confirming the judgment and decree dated 22.08.1997 passed in O.S.No.664 of 1989, on the file of Principal District Munsif Court, Thirukkovilur.

2. Parties are referred to as per their rankings in the trial Court.

3. Suit for declaration, permanent injunction and damages.

4. In brief, according to the plaintiff's case, the plaint A schedule property originally belong to the plaintiff's father Natesa mudaliar and was in his possession and enjoyment and the plaintiff's father sold the plaint A schedule property on 02.04.1930 to the third defendant's father Munusamy pillai and others and while selling the property by way of the above said sale deed, the plaintiff's father had sold the said property excluding the south wall situated on the southern side of the said property and therefore, only the portion situated to the north of the south wall had been sold by the plaintiff's father in the above mentioned sale deed and the said south wall measuring 2 feet width and 69 feet length is the B schedule property



















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