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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 790

R. HEMALATHA
P. Subramanian – Appellant
Versus
Mariasundari @ Sundari – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:T.S. Vijaya Raghavan, Advocate. For the Respondent: R1 & R2, No Appearance.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 CPC, 1908 against the decree and judgment dated 07.09.2010 passed in A.S. No.30 of 2009, on the file of the I Additional Sub Court, Salem, reversing the decree and judgment dated 15.11.2008 passed in O.S. No.2123 of 2004, on the file of the II Additional District Munsif, Salem.)

1. The appellant is the 2nd defendant in O.S. No.2123 of 2004 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif, Salem. The 1st respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance of contract and also for a declaration that the sale deed executed by the 1st defendant in favour of the 2nd defendant as null and void and for a consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the 2nd defendant from interfering with her peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property.

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 appeal would also be indicated.

3. The case of the plaintiff in nutshell is as follows:

    i. The suit property is a house site in Block No.11, T.S. No.4, Salem Town, admeasuring 437 sq. ft along with a tiled house

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