Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Mr.Ashok Menon, J
K.Ganesan – Appellant
Versus
R.Banumathi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of property ownership (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. parties' arguments on limitation and cause of action (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. court's observations on procedural history and liberty granted (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 4. analysis of limitation issues and title denial (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 5. court's reasoning on the need for trial (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46) |
| 6. final ruling and restoration of the suit (Para 54 , 55) |
JUDGMENT
The above Second Appeal throws up an interesting question of law as to whether the plea of limitation can be raised in an Order 7 Rule 11 application under the Code of Civil Procedure , when the Hon'ble Supreme Court had granted liberty to the plaintiffs to seek the relief of declaration of title. The parties are described as per their litigative status before the trial court.
2. The appellants are the plaintiffs, who suffered concurrent findings before the Courts below, in an application filed by the defendants to reject the plaint on the ground that it is barred by Limitation. The material facts of the case, for better appreciation of the facts and the l
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
