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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 927

S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
Balaji – Appellant
Versus
Arumugam – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mr.Y.Kaja Navas
For the Respondents: Mr.T.P.Prabakaran

JUDGMENT :

The present Appeal Suit has been filed against the order and decree passed by the learned II Additional District Judge, Vellore @ Ranipet in IA No.4 of 2020 in OS No.95 of 2019 dated 24.03.2022.

2. The appellants are plaintiffs and the respondents are defendants in the suit. The suit was instituted for declaration and permanent injunction and for recovery of possession.

3. It is not in dispute that the defendants in the suit filed written statement and thereafter an Interlocutory Application was filed in IA No.4 of 2020 for rejection of plaint under Order VII, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

4. The Trial Court adjudicated the issues and allowed the application and the plaint was rejected. Thus, the appellants have chosen to prefer the present appeal Suit.

5. The learned counsel for the appellants-plaintiffs mainly contended that the appellants herein earlier filed suit for partition, which was dismissed and the order of the Trial Court was confirmed in the appeal suit.

6. There is an observation in the judgment of the Trial Court as well as in the First Appellate Court order that the title of the plaintiffs is denied by the defendants and they are in possession. In suc

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