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

2021 Supreme(Mad) 949

P.T.ASHA
R. Uma Devi – Appellant
Versus
C. Jeyachandran – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.A.L.Ganthimathi
For the Respondent: Mr.V. Manohar

JUDGMENT :

1. The plaintiff in the suit O.S.No.327 of 2004 is the appellant before this Court. The parties are arrayed in the same ranking as in the suit.

2.The facts in brief which are necessary for disposing of the above Second Appeal are hereinbelow narrated:

PLAINTIFF'S CASE:

The plaintiff has filed the suit for a Partition and separate possession of her 1/4th share in the suit schedule properties which consisted of 5 items of the properties. It is the case of the plaintiff that the properties in question were the ancestral joint family properties of her father-in-law Chinaraji (father of her husband Ravi). The said Chinaraji died leaving behind him surviving wife, the 2nd defendant, his sons, Ravi, the plaintiff's husband, Jeyachandran and his daughter Jayalakshmi as his legal representatives to succeed to the joint family properties. The case of the plaintiff is that her husband was suffering from AIDS and was totally bedridden and undergoing treatment. The 1st defendant has appeared to have got a Release Deed dated 15.06.2004 executed as if the same was executed by her husband Ravi. The plaintiff is not aware of such Deed and within a few days of filing the divorce application,

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