Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J
Tmt.M.Iniya – Appellant
Versus
Xavier Britto – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding unauthorized construction (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. defendants' position on regularization and limitations (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. court's analysis on continuous wrong and limitations (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. court's observations on the legal precedents (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 6. court's conclusions on the necessity of injunction (Para 21 , 22) |
| 7. final judgment and decree (Para 23) |
JUDGMENT
This Appeal had been filed to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 17.06.2014 passed in O.S. No. 11802 of 2010 on the file of the learned XIX Additional District Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.
2. The Appellants are the Plaintiffs in the Suit in O.S.No.11802 of 2010. The Suit was filed in the Original Side of this Court as C.S. No. 443 of 2009 and subsequently it was transferred to the file of the City Civil Court, Chennai due to enhancement of pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Courts as per Act 9/2010. Upon transfer, the case was re-numbered as O.S.No.11802 of 2010.
3. The Suit was filed by the Plaintiffs seeking mandatory injunction directing the first and second Defendants to remove the offending c
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
