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) 3631

T.RAVINDRAN
Radhakrishnan – Appellant
Versus
Tamilarasi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :T. Dhanasekar, Advocate.
For the Respondent:K. Goviganesan, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

1. This second appeal has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 17.07.2000 made in A.S. No. 1 of 1999 on the file of the Additional District Court, Villupuram, confirming the judgment and decree dated 20.11.1998 passed in O.S. No. 792 of 1995, on the file of the Court of the 2nd Additional District Judge, Ulundurpet.

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

3. Suit for declaration and permanent injunction.

4. The case of the plaintiff in brief is that the suit property is the ancestral property of one Annamalai, who died 50 years ago and after his death, his sons Sakkarai and Sappaiyan, inherited the suit property and after their life time, their legal representatives directly or through some of them are in possession and enjoyment of the suit property and the old patta number is 246 and the new patta number is 647 for the suit property and under the UDR scheme patta was granted in favour of the plaintiffs and in enjoyment of the plaintiffs. While so, the defendants who have no right or interest attempted to trespass into the suit property illegally, hence according to the plaintiffs they had been necessitated to lay the suit for














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