Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K.MURALI SHANKAR
Nallammal – Appellant
Versus
Rajeshwari – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K. MURALI SHANKAR, J.
1. The Second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree, dated 11.09.2024 made in A.S. No.29 of 2019 on the file of the Principal District Court, Dindigul, confirming the judgment and decree, dated 28.02.2019 made in O.S. No.191 of 2015 on the file of the Sub Court, Vedasandur.
2. The appellants are the defendants. The first respondent as plaintiff filed a suit claiming partition and allotment of 1/3 share in the suit properties.
3. The defendants 1 to 3 filed their written statement and contested the suit. The learned Subordinate Judge, Vedasandur, after framing necessary issues and after full trial, passed a judgment and decree, dated 28.02.2019, granting preliminary decree declaring that the plaintiff is entitled to get 1/3 share in the suit property and dismissing the suit as against the fourth defendant/Bank. Aggrieved by the passing of preliminary decree, the defendants 1 to 3 preferred an appeal in A.S.No.29 of 2019 and the learned Principal District Judge, Dindigul, upon considering the materials available on record and on hearing the arguments of both the sides, passed the impugned judgment, dated 11.09.2024, dismissing the appeal and
The High Court's review under Section 100 CPC is limited to substantial questions of law and does not allow re-evaluation of factual findings made by lower courts.
The High Court's jurisdiction in a second appeal is limited to substantial questions of law, with no re-appraisal of factual findings made by lower courts; the burden of proof for joint family proper....
The right to inherit properties can be lost due to delay in claiming partition, as seen in cases of ouster and adverse possession.
The High Court's review under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code is restricted to substantial questions of law, with no interference allowed on factual findings absent error.
The High Court's jurisdiction in second appeals is limited to substantial questions of law without re-evaluating the evidentiary findings of the trial courts.
In matters of partition, proof of ancestral property entitlement and the absence of substantial legal questions are critical for appeal outcomes.
The court upheld the entitlement of the plaintiff's share in ancestral properties and directed the determination of her legal heirs and the validity of her Will before distribution.
The High Court's jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC is limited to substantial questions of law, not factual disputes, and dismissal of a previous suit for default does not invoke res judicata if base....
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
