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

2026 Supreme(Mad) 304

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B.BALAJI
T. Shanmuga Bharathivel – Appellant
Versus
Prema – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : N. Suresh
For the Respondents: N. Manoharan, D. Vasanth

Table of Content
1. introduction of the case and procedural background. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioner claims possession under unregistered sale deed. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. legal objections surrounding document admissibility. (Para 6 , 7 , 16)
4. respondents argue against document's admissibility. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
5. court's assessment of document marking and objections. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
6. procedure for document rejection and admissibility. (Para 17 , 18 , 23)
7. supreme court decisions on document admissibility and collateral purposes. (Para 19 , 20 , 21)
8. clarification on non-registration and its consequences. (Para 24 , 25 , 26)
9. conclusion on inadmissibility of the document. (Para 27)
10. final judgment dismissal and conclusion. (Para 28)

ORDER :

2. I have heard Mr.N.Suresh, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Mr.N.Manoharan for Mr.D.Vasanth, learned counsel for the respondents. I have also gone through the records, including the order impugned in the revision petition, besides various decisions on which reliance has been placed on by both the learned counsel.

4. In fact, Mr.N.Suresh, learned counsel for the revision petitioner, pointing out to the certified copies of th

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