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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 3113

M. DHANDAPANI
Durairaj Adhiyamaan – Appellant
Versus
G. Somasundaram – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants :K. Selvaraj, Advocate. For the Respondents:V.K. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal filed under Order XXI Rule 104 r/w Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree dated 21.09.2001 in C.M.A. No.6/2001 on the file of the Addl. District Judge, Nagapattinam, confirming the judgment and decree dated 25.4.2000 in E.A. No.1/1998 in E.P. No.75/1997 in O.S. No.309/1994 on the file of the Addl. Sub Court, Nagapattinam.)

1. Assailing the concurrent findings recorded by the courts below in favour of the respondents herein by holding that the claim of the appellants is barred by limitation, the present civil miscellaneous second appeal has been filed by the first appellant.

2. Pending the appeal, which dates two decades back, the first appellant having passed away, appellants 2 to 5, the legal heirs of the deceased first appellant, have been brought on record to defend the appeal. For the sake of convenience, the array of the parties will be referred to as ‘appellants’ and ‘respondents’ in the order, as they are arrayed before this Court in the present appeal.

3. The case of the appellants, in brief, as projected before the courts below is that the petition mentioned properties in issue originally b

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