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

2024 Supreme(Mad) 2379

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
H.Sumathi – Appellant
Versus
Nallammal – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ms.J.Prithivi
For the Respondents: No appearance

ORDER :

V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

This civil revision petition is at the instance of the plaintiff. O.S.No.252 of 2016 on the file of the I Additional District Munsif Court at Salem is a suit for permanent injunction.

2. The case of the plaintiff is that she had purchased the property on 18.11.2002. Since the defendants interfered with her possession, she was constrained to present the suit. It is the case of the defendants that the plaintiff had entered into a sale agreement on 11.03.2013 and had received a sum of Rs.2,25,000/- towards the said sale agreement. Subsequently, defendants 6 & 7 demanded the plaintiff to execute the sale deed on the basis of the sale agreement dated 11.03.2013. According to the 6th defendant, pursuant to the sale agreement, the sale deed by which the plaintiff purchased the property on 18.11.2002 was also handed over to them. On the basis of these pleadings, the parties went for trial.

3. The plaintiff examined herself as P.W.1 and the 6th defendant as D.W.1. During the course of examination, the original sale deed dated 18.11.2002 was marked on the side of the defendants. In addition, the 6th defendant also marked the sale agreement dated 11.03.2013 which t

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