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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 902

ABDUL QUDDHOSE
Gothainayaki – Appellant
Versus
Arumuga Nainar – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellants:H. Arumugam, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, against the judgment and decree dated 24.06.2022 passed in A.S.No.125 of 2018 on the file of the 1st Additional District Court, Tirunelveli confirming the judgment and decree dated 06.02.2018 passed in O.S.No.22 of 2012 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Tirunelveli.)

1. This Second Appeal has been filed challenging the concurrent findings of the courts below. The plaintiffs in the suit in O.S.No. 22 of 2012 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Tirunelveli are the appellants herein.

2. The suit was filed for partition claiming 4/5th share in the suit schedule property. The plaintiffs claim that their father Arumuga Nainar, the first defendant in the suit led a wavered life and he never executed a sale deed dated 21.02.2007 in favour of the second defendant. According to the plaintiffs, after the death of their father Arumuga Nainar, they are entitled to 4/5th share. The plaintiffs claim that the suit schedule property is an ancestral property of Kadarkariandi Nadar. The plaintiffs being his grand children are therefore entitled to equal shares along with the first defendant who is their fa

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