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

2022 Supreme(Mad) 371

R.VIJAYAKUMAR
Malaiyandi Naicker – Appellant
Versus
Janakiraman – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :D. Senthil, Advocate.
For the Respondent:J. Barathan, Advocate, G. Sivaraja, Government Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of C.P.C, to set aside the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.129 of 2017 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Mudukulathur dated 24.09.2020 confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.38 of 2015 on the file of the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Kamuthi, dated 31.10.2017.)

1. The plaintiff is the appellant.

2. The plaintiff filed O.S.No.38 of 2015 before the Principal District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Kamuthi, Ramanathapuram District for declaration of title and consequential injunction. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court. The plaintiff filed A.S.No.129 of 2017 before the Subordinate Court, Muthukulathur. The appeal was also dismissed. As against the same, the present second appeal has been filed by the plaintiff.

3. The plaintiff had contended that the suit schedule property is located in Survey No.432/18. Immediately, on the north of the suit schedule property, the plaintiff's house property is located in Survey No.432/19. According to the plaintiff, in the south of the suit schedule property, the plaintiff has left out 1½ feet and the defendants on their northern side has left

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