Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K.MURALI SHANKAR
Sivaraj – Appellant
Versus
Shanthi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. second appeal framed against judgments from lower courts. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. plaintiff claims possession of agricultural properties against defendants' assertions. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court emphasizes its jurisdiction is limited to substantial questions of law. (Para 11 , 12 , 22) |
| 4. requirements for injunction established based on possession rights. (Para 24 , 26) |
| 5. second appeal found to lack substantial questions, warrants dismissal. (Para 30 , 31) |
JUDGMENT :
K. MURALI SHANKAR, J.
The Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree made in A.S.No.71 of 2018, dated 28.03.2022, on the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Kumbakonam, confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.3 of 2014, dated 09.07.2018, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Kumbakonam.
2. The appellants are the plaintiffs 1 and 2. The deceased Sarbunnisa Begam filed a suit in O.S.No.3 of 2014 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Kumbakonam claiming permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their men from any manner interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. Pending first appeal, the sole plaintiff d
The High Court's jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC is confined to substantial questions of law, without re-assessing evidence or entering factual disputes.
The court affirmed the plaintiff's status as a cultivating tenant based on revenue records, emphasizing that the appellate court erred in reversing the trial court's decision regarding possession.
The burden of proof for establishing tenancy rights lies with the claimant, and mere long possession does not confer such rights, particularly for caretakers.
The court reaffirmed that established ownership protects lawful possession, reinforcing the principle that cultivating tenants cannot be evicted without adherence to statutory procedures.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of a person related to the original tenant to seek the relief of permanent injunction and the rejection of claims of impersonation.
Legal heirs claiming cultivating tenant status must establish physical contribution to cultivation; mere documentation of tenancy by a deceased parent is insufficient.
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
