Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Ms Justice R.N.MANJULA
Doraisamy Gounder (Died) S/o Ramasamy Gounder – Appellant
Versus
Perumal Gounder (Died) S/o Ramasamy Gounder – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The appellants in both the suits are the 3nd defendant and the legal heirs of the defendants 1 and 2 in O.S.No.181/1999. The plaintiffs filed a suit in OS.NO.181/1999 against the defendants seeking the relief of permanent injunction. The defendants have filed a counter suit in OS.No.184/1999 claiming the relief of declaration and permanent injunction. Both the suits have been tried together and a common judgement has been pronounced in which, the trial Court, has decreed the suit filed in OS.No.181/1999 and dismissed the suit filed by these appellants in OS.No.184/1999. Both the first appeals preferred by the present appellants also got dismissed by confirming the judgement of the trial court. Aggrieved over that the appellants, who were the defendants in OS.No.181/1999 and plaintiffs in OS.No.184/1999 before the trial Court, have preferred these two second appeals.
2. The case of the plaintiff, as it appears from the plaint filed by them in OS.No.181/1999, are as follows:
The suit properties belonged to the plaintiffs and they have been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the plaintiffs for more than 30 years. The suit property are situated in S.No.650/4 -0.56.0 a
In property disputes, the burden of proof lies on the party asserting a right; mere claims without corroborative evidence do not substantiate title or possession.
The necessity of seeking a declaration of right when claiming a pathway right in a property belonging to another party.
The court affirmed that the Suit Property is a Natham Pathway, granting plaintiffs limited injunction against obstruction until defendants prove their title.
A claimant must establish exclusive settled possession and document rights to land for relief against interference; admissions impacting access rights must be substantiated.
The court emphasized that granting a temporary injunction requires clear evidence of a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury, which were inadequately established by the pla....
A suit for permanent injunction requires proof of possession; if title is disputed, a declaratory suit is necessary, and failure to include necessary parties renders the suit untenable.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of evidence of possession and title in a suit for permanent injunction, the principles of granting preventive relief and perpetual i....
The plaintiff, having established easementary right, was entitled to consequential relief of permanent injunction to prevent a multiplicity of judicial proceedings.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
