Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.ARUL MURUGAN
V.Ekambaram (Died) – Appellant
Versus
S.Sekar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.
1.The unsuccessful plaintiff is before this Court in Second Appeal. Pending appeal, sole appellant died and the appellants 2 to 5 have been substituted as legal heirs. The defendants in the suit are the respondents herein.
2. This Second Appeal has been filed as against the judgment and decree dated 15.06.2010 in A.S.No.38 of 2008 on the file the Additional Subordinate Court, Chengalpattu confirming the judgment and decree dated 18.12.2007 passed in O.S.No.294 of 1999 by District Munsif Court, Chengalpattu.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per the ranking before the Trial Court.
The brief facts, as per the averments in the plaint, are as under:
4. According to the plaintiff, he is the absolute owner of the vacant land and building comprised in Old Survey No.93B/1B and New Survey No.178/2 to an extent of 1874 sq.ft situated at No.42/42A, Manimegalai Street, Guduvancherry, Kancheepuram District.
5. According to the plaintiff, the suit property originally belonged to plaintiff's brothers namely Gajendran and Mani respectively. His brother Gajendran sold the suit property in his favour by the registered sale deed dated 07.02.1972 bea
The appellate court must independently assess evidence and provide detailed reasoning in its decision, failing which the judgment is procedural error.
The appellate courts must adhere to procedural mandates, ensuring independent evaluation and reasoned findings, as failure to do so renders judgments unsustainable.
The First Appellate Court's compliance with procedural requirements under Order 41 Rule 31 of CPC is essential for ensuring fair adjudication, even if specific points for determination are not framed....
The First Appellate Court must independently assess evidence and provide detailed findings on all relevant issues, failing which its decision is unsustainable.
The First Appellate Court must comply with procedural requirements and evaluate evidence from both parties; failure to do so renders its findings perverse.
The First Appellate Court correctly reversed the trial court's decree due to insufficient evidence from the plaintiffs to establish title over the suit property.
The appellate court must independently assess evidence and cannot place the burden of proof on the defendant when the plaintiff fails to establish his claim.
(1) Only when title is clear, Court can decide question of de jure possession.(2) Question of title can be decided only by filing a comprehensive suit for declaration of title and not a suit for inju....
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
