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

2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 13081

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
R.Vijayakumar, J
K.Mathan Raja – Appellant
Versus
R.Shivani – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.M.P.Senthil
For the Respondents: Mr.H.Lakshmi Shankar

O R D E R

The defendant in O.S.No.108 of 2020 on the file of the I Additional District Munsif Court, Nagercoil, has filed the present Civil Revision Petition challenging the dismissal of his application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C r/w 7, 12 (2), 37 and 37(2) of Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuations Act 14 of 1955.

2. A perusal of the records reveal that the above said suit has been filed for the relief of mandatory injunction to hand over possession of the suit schedule properties to the plaintiff. A perusal of the plaint averments reveal that the plaintiff is the sister's daughter of the defendant. The suit property originally belonged to one V.Krishnan, who had died leaving behind his son K.Mathan Raja (defendant) and daughter Parvathy. Parvathy's daughter is Shivani, who is the plaintiff in the present suit. According to the plaintiff, Mr.V.Krishnan has executed a Will in her favour on 27.05.2005 and he passed away in the year 2014. Therefore, she is the absolute owner of the property.

3. The plaintiff has further claimed that the defendant in the suit who is her maternal uncle was permitted to be in occupation of the suit schedule properties. When she was asked to

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