Back
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
General Manager, Head Quarters, Southern Railways, Chennai – Appellant
Versus
Ayyakannu (Died) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of C.P.C. against the judgment and decree dated 12.04.2017, passed in A.S.No.106 of 2015, on the file of the I Additional Sub Court, Trichy, in confirming the judgment and decree, dated 02.03.2015, passed in O.S.No.917 of 2006, on the file of the I Additional District Munsif, Trichy.)
1. The unsuccessful defendants in the suit are the appellants herein.
2. The plaintiffs filed the suit for the relief of declaration and permanent injunction, in respect of the suit property.
3. The case of the plaintiffs is that the suit property, which is a cultivable nanja land, bearing Old S.No.276, situated at Abisekarapuram Village, Trichy, originally belonged to one Late Mottaiyandi and he was in possession and enjoyment of the same till his death, i.e. on 28.03.1994. After the death of said Mottaiyandi, a portion of the property, in S.No.276 was converted as a Pathway and the remaining portion has been in possession and enjoyment of the plaintiffs and the suit property is the ancestral property and they are claiming right over the same by virtue of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (hereinafter, referred to as 'the Act').
3.1 It is the further ca
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the presentation of revenue documents alone is not sufficient to establish title over ancestral property, and the burden of proof lies with th....
A suit for permanent injunction is not maintainable without seeking a declaration of title when the plaintiff's title to the property is in dispute or under a cloud. The grant of patta and reliance o....
A suit for permanent injunction requires proof of possession; if title is disputed, a declaratory suit is necessary, and failure to include necessary parties renders the suit untenable.
Patta and title deed pass books issued under the Act, 1971 carry a presumption of title and possession, and this presumption can only be rebutted through an appeal, revision, or by a court of law.
Revenue records do not confer title or prove possession against commissioner report and admissions showing physical division by road and fencing; injunction suit maintainable on possession without de....
Possession established by parties through revenue documents prevails over contested ownership claims; mere sale deed insufficient to negate established rights.
A permanent injunction can be granted against a co-owner if the plaintiffs establish their possession and enjoyment of the property, despite the defendant's claims.
Possession follows title; entries in revenue records do not confer ownership. A suit for injunction is maintainable without seeking declaration of title when possession is established.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
