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

2022 Supreme(Mad) 2525

R. N. MANJULA
K. Nirmala – Appellant
Versus
S. Anbunathan – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Parties:P.B. Sampath kumar, D.S. Ramesh, P. Jayaraman, G. Madhan Raj, Advocates.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: These Appeals have been filed under Section 96 and Order 41 Rule 1 of C.P.C., to set aside the judgment and decree dated 14.09.2018 made in O.S.Nos.11665 & 11174 of 2010, on the file of the VI Additional Judge, City Civil Court at Chennai.)

Common Judgment

1. These Appeal Suits have been filed to set aside the judgment and decree dated 14.09.2018 made in O.S.Nos.11665 & 11174 of 2010, on the file of the VI Additional Judge, City Civil Court at Chennai.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the materials placed on record.

3. Despite there are three suit properties, the dispute revolves around the first item of the Schedule mentioned properties.

4. The appellant is the first defendant in both the suits. The plaintiff S.Anbunathan in O.S.No.11665 of 2010 and the plaintiff Kalavathi in O.S.No.11174 of 2010 are the brother and sister of the first defendant. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred with their names.

5. The short facts of the case are as follows:

The parents of both the plaintiffs and the first defendant were natives of Pondicherry; after some time, the parents came down to

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