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

2023 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 28029

MADRAS HIGH COURT
Honourable Mr Justice B.PUGALENDHI
Deva Sivarajan, – Appellant
Versus
M.Saroja, – Respondent


ORDER

The petitioner has proposed to file a suit before the District Munsif Court, Eraniel, Kanyakumari District, for declaring a settlement deed executed by the first defendant in favour of the second defendant as null and void and also for a permanent injunction. The petitioner has also paid the Court fee u/s.25(d) of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act. But the trial Court returned the plaint for payment of Court fee as per the decision in J.Vasanthi v. N.Ramani Kanthammal [2017 (11) SCC 852]. Aggrieved over such return, the petitioner has moved the present revision petition.

2.According to the petitioner, the first respondent is his mother and the second respondent is his younger brother. The suit schedule property originally belonged to his father, Thangaswamy. The said Thangaswamy executed a settlement deed in respect of the suit property in favour of his wife / the first respondent herein. The petitioner, the first respondent and the said Thangaswamy have jointly decided to construct a residential house in the suit property, with an arrangement to hand over the ground floor to the second respondent and the first floor to the petitioner. Accordingly, they have inv

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