Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.SOUNTHAR
Govindasamy – Appellant
Versus
Rajini – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S. SOUNTHAR, J.
S.A.No.128 of 2020 is arising out of suit for declaration and injunction filed by the respondents 1 and 2, in respect of 2.62 acres in S.No.167/1A. The respondent's suit for declaration and injunction was decreed by the trial Court, only to the extent of four boundaries mentioned under Ex.A3. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants filed an appeal in A.S.No.40 of 2017. The First Appellate Court, while dismissing the appeal modified the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court and decreed the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, S.A.No.128 of 2020 has been filed.
2. S.A.No.131 of 2020 is arising out of suit for declaration and injunction filed by the appellants in respect of 0.54 cents in S.No.167/1A and also two other items of properties in S.Nos.167/2 and 166/4. Since there was no dispute between the parties in respect of items 2 and 3, the trial Court decreed the suit as far as items 2 and 3 are concerned. The suit was dismissed insofar as item one is concerned. At the time of dismissing the suit, the trial Court also observed that if the suit property does not come within the property covered by Ex.A3 then the plaintiffs are entitled to claim title over the
A party claiming title must prove the vendor's title; assumptions or gaps in evidence are insufficient to establish ownership.
The Court established that attempting to claim declaration in respect of the same property, which was already dealt with in an earlier suit, was impermissible and an abuse of process of law.
A second appeal under Section 100 CPC is restricted to substantial questions of law; the High Court cannot re-appreciate evidence or allow amendments that fundamentally alter the nature of a suit or ....
The plaintiff must prove the title over the suit property and cannot succeed based on the weakness of the defendant's case. The procedure for entertaining additional evidence must be followed, and pr....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the bar under Order 9 Rule 9 read with Section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, which rendered the suits not maintainable.
A suit for injunction is not maintainable if the plaintiff has knowledge of unclear title issues and the vendors lack the right to convey property.
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
