M.M.SUNDRESH, C.SARAVANAN
R. Ananda Padmanabhan – Appellant
Versus
R. Vadivel Gounder – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.M. Sundresh, J.
1. Seeking review of the order passed by a Division Bench in confirming the order of the learned trial Court in decreeing the suit for specific performance, the present application has been filed.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants/appellants made only one submission. It is submitted that there is an error apparent of the face of the record. The judgment and decree rendered by the trial Court. as confirmed by this Court, has to be termed as nullity. When once it is termed as nullity coupled with the fact that there is a lack of jurisdiction involving a question of law, then the review would be maintainable since it will amount to a void judgment.
3. In substance, the learned counsel has submitted that Ex. A1 speaks about the possession having been handed over in favour of the respondents by the appellants. Though the suit has been filed for specific performance and for permanent injunction restraining the applicants/appellants from alienating or encumbering the suit property, in the absence of any registration done as governed under Section 17 (1-A) of the Indian Registration Act, the suit ought to have been dismissed as not maintainable. Secti
Minor Ravi Bharathi v. P. Balasubramani and Another LNIND 2014 MAD 6651 : (2014) 8 MLJ 562
Maritime Electric Co., Ltd. v. General Dairies
P. Jayarama Pillai v. Union Bank of India and Another LNIND 1990 MAD 361 : (1991) 2 MLJ 43;
Palaniammal and Others v. M. Ravi Shankiar and Another 2013 1 LW 998.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.