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

2021 Supreme(Mad) 1932

P.T.ASHA
C. Murugan – Appellant
Versus
C. Chellakani – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :M. Velmurugan, Advocate
For the Respondent:P. Rajendra Kumar, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Appeal Suit filed under Section 96 read with Order 41 Rule (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Judgment and Decree dated 04.12.2013 in O.S.No.8475 of 2011 on the file of the learned III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.)

1. The defendant is the appellant before this Court. He has filed the above appeal challenging the Judgment and Decree granted by the learned III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai in O.S.No.8475 of 2011 dated 04.12.2013. The said suit was filed by the plaintiff/respondent claiming partition and separate possession of his 1/2 share in the suit schedule property. The parties are referred to in the same litigative status as before the trial Court.

2. The facts in brief which are essential for deciding the above Appeal are herein below narrated:

PLAINTIFF’S CASE:

The plaintiff would submit that he and the defendant who are the siblings had been carrying on business in the name and style of “Om Murugan Agency” with each of them contributing equally to the Partnership. It is the case of the plaintiff that in the year 1

      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