Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. Sathish Kumar, J
S.Palani @ Sundar – Appellant
Versus
Sundararaju – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction to joint appeal suits (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. defendants' claims of property ownership (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. framed issues of trial court (Para 6) |
| 4. trial court's judgments overview (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. appellant's arguments presented (Para 9 , 10) |
| 6. defendants' counterarguments presented (Para 12) |
| 7. court's examination of property purchase claims (Para 14 , 15 , 19 , 20) |
| 8. deliberation on evidence and admissibility (Para 21 , 22 , 36) |
| 9. establishment of property as joint family property (Para 26 , 28 , 30 , 32 , 34) |
| 10. final judgment and order (Para 40) |
COMMON JUDGMENT
The plaintiff in O.S.No.218 of 2010 and who is also the sole defendant in O.S.No.202 of 2015 has come up with these Appeal Suits aggrieved by the dismissal of his suit for partition in respect of 'B' and 'C' Schedule properties and decree passed against him in the suit for bare injunction.
2. The suit in O.S.No.218 of 2010 was filed by the appellant herein for partition and the suit in O.S.No.202 of 2015 was filed by the 1st defendant in O.S.No.218 of 2010 against the plaintiff therein for permanent injunction. Since a joint trial was conducted and the evidence was recorded in common in O.S.No. 218/20
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
