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

2018 Supreme(Mad) 1916

T.RAVINDRAN
Periasamy – Appellant
Versus
Anjalam – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mrs. Zeenath Begum
For the Respondent: Mr. D. Shivakumaran

JUDGMENT :

In this second appeal, challenge is made to the judgment and decree dated 21.11.2002 passed in A.S.No.25 of 2002 on the file of the Principal District Court, Salem, reversing the judgment and decree dated 21.12.2001 passed in O.S. No.853 of 1999, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Salem.

2. The second appeal has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law.

"1. When a civil suit is pending adjudication between the parties, whether an order made by a revenue authority regarding same suit property pendent title can be looked into by the civil court?

2. When the plaintiff's possession of the suit property as on date of suit is admitted whether a decree for injunction to protect his possession can be negatived?"

3. Considering the scope of the issues involved between the parties as regards the subject matter lying in a narrow compass, it is unnecessary to dwell into the facts of the case in detail.

4. The suit has been laid simplicitor for the relief of permanent injunction.

5. The plaintiff claims the title to the suit properties and asserts to be in the possession of the same on the strength of the sale deed dated 30.08.1996 executed by Thangaraj a









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