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

P. B. BALAJI
Masilamani – Appellant
Versus
Mani Alias Vanithamani – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. R. Rajarajan, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1:Ms. R. Ramesh, Advocate
For the Respondent Nos.2 to 6: No Appearance

JUDGMENT

The plaintiff, in a suit for injunction, who initially succeeded before the trial Court, but lost before the First Appellate Court is the appellant.

2. The parties are described as per their litigative status before the trial Court.

3. The material facts that are necessary for deciding the present Second Appeal are as follows:

3.1. It is the case of the plaintiff that the first defendant is the father of the plaintiff. The second defendant is the wife of the first defendant and defendants 3, 4 and 6 are the siblings and 5th defendant is the husband of the 4th defendant. According to the plaintiff, the suit property comprises 6 cents out of 84 Ares in S.N.919/9. Though the properties were inherited by the first defendant and though there was no formal partition in the family, there was a family arrangement pursuant to which, the defendants 1 and 2 viz., the parents sold the suit property to one Selvaraj on 01.12.2005. The said Selvaraj, in turn, in and by sale deed dated 27.11.2008, sold the suit property to the plaintiff. The plaintiff has mutated revenue records in his favour and had been in possession of the suit property without any interference from any person whomsoev

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