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

2022 Supreme(Mad) 1629

R. HEMALATHA
Lakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Subramani – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:Abu Backer Sidhic, Narendhiran, Advocates. For the Respondents:R7 & R3, M. Palani, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer in S.A.No.421 of 2006: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 CPC, 1908 against the decree and judgment dated 18.03.2005 passed in A.S.No.50 of 2001, on the file of the I Additional District Court, Erode, reversing the decree and judgment dated 18.08.1998 passed in O.S.No.680 of 1981, on the file of the I Additional District Munsif Court, Erode.

S.A.No.422 of 2006: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 CPC, 1908 against the decree and judgment dated 18.03.2005 passed in A.S.No.51 of 2001, on the file of the I Additional District Court, Erode, upholding the decree and judgment dated 18.08.1998 passed in O.S.No.680 of 1981, on the file of the I Additional District Munsif Court, Erode.)

Common Judgment

1. The appellant in both the appeals is the plaintiff in O.S.No.680/1981 on the file of I Additional District Munsif Court, Erode. She filed the suit for partition and separate possession of the suit properties.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking in the trial court and at appropriate places, their rank in the present appeals would also be indicated.

3. The minimum facts that are required for the disposal of the present second appea

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