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

2025 Supreme(Mad) 5138

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.Sathish Kumar
Prema – Appellant
Versus
Nallasellam – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.R.Venkatesulu
Assistance rendered by : Mr.N.Manoharan

ORDER :

N. Sathish Kumar, J.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant.

2. According to the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, except Item No.2 and part of Item No.3, he has no other grievance in respect of other properties. It is his contention that the Item No.2 is the separate property of his mother. Similarly, Item No.3, in respect of 72 cents, preliminary decree ought not to have been granted.

3. Taking note of the above submissions, this appeal is admitted for the above limited purpose.

4. Notice to the respondent returnable by 23.06.2025. Private notice is also permitted.

5. In the meanwhile, the registry is directed to call for the records from the trial Court.

6. Till such time, passing of final decree alone is stayed.

7. An attention of this Court has been drawn to a decision of a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of V.S.Chandrasekaran vs. R.Uma in A.S(MD).No. 5 of 2025 dated 25.04.2025, wherein, esteemed Brother Judge, Mr. Justice G.R.Swaminathan, who authored the judgment after referring to Karupuchetty's case has observed as follows:

“The Hon'ble Judge after citing quite a few decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court (U.P.Avas Evam Vikas Paris

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