A. David, S/o. Appavoo vs N. Natarajan

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Mad) 2200

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.VADAMALAI
A. David, S/o. Appavoo – Appellant
Versus
N. Natarajan – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Ms. J. Anandhavalli
For the Respondents: Mr. C. Kishore, Ex-parte vide in E.B.

Table of Content
1. appeal context and parties (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. dispute over property ownership (Para 4 , 5)
3. findings on evidence presented (Para 6 , 7 , 10 , 12)
4. arguments regarding title and possession (Para 8 , 11 , 13 , 14)
5. substantial questions of law addressed (Para 9 , 18)
6. legal implications of findings (Para 19 , 21 , 22)
7. outcome of the appeal (Para 23 , 24)

JUDGMENT :

P. VADAMALAI, J.

This Second Appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree, dated 02.11.2017 passed in A.S.No.28 of 2015 on the file of the Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram, confirming the judgment and decree, dated 30.01.2015 passed in O.S.No.90 of 2012 on the file of Additional District Munsif Court, Padmanabhapuram.

2. The appellant is the 1st defendant and the respondents are the plaintiff and 2^nd defendant in O.S.No.90 of 2012 on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Padmanabhapuram. The 1^st respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for permanent injunction and mandatory injunction directing the defendants to remove the newly erected eight stone pillars and newly put up barbed wire fence existing within the suit property on its western side.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are ref