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

2018 Supreme(Mad) 2305

T.RAVINDRAN
P. K. Rangayyan – Appellant
Versus
P. K. Chinnasami – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. N. Manokaran for Mr. R. Prabakaran.

JUDGMENT :

1. Challenge, in this second appeal, is made to the Judgment and Decree dated 28.06.2002 passed in A.S.No.31 of 2002 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.IV, Erode, at Bhavani, reversing the Judgment and Decree dated 13.11.2000 passed in O.S.No.165 of 1997 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Bhavani.

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

“(a). Whether the lower Appellate Court is right in holding that Ex.A3 partition deed between the parties is sham and nominal, overlooking that admittedly Ex.A3 was entered into by the parties voluntarily, executed, got registered and acted upon by paying separate kists, transferring pattas and transferring the electricity service connections in their respective names?

(b). Whether the present suit for partition is maintainable without a prayer for setting aside the earlier partition under Ex.A3 entered into by the parties?”

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

4. The suit has been laid by the pl





























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