Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Mrs.Justice S.Srimathy, J
Smt.R.Onila – Appellant
Versus
The Tahsildar, Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar District. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership and possession of property (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. defendants' claims and counterarguments (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. court's analysis of evidence and legal standards (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 4. final judgment and decree (Para 27) |
JUDGMENT
2. The plaintiff in the suit is the appellant herein and the defendants in the suit are the respondents herein. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred as plaintiff and defendants as per the ranking in the suit.
4. While the plaintiff's husband was in possession, he had put up a thatched shed with mud wall in the portion of the schedule property. Subsequently the same had fallen down, but remanence of the same is available. Then the plaintiff's husband and his brother orally partitioned the entire schedule property in two portions in the month of Thai 2001. In that oral partition, the southern portion of 20 cents was allotted to the share of the plaintiff's husband and northern portion was allotted to the share of the plaintiff husband's brother Muthukannan. Even after partition the plaintiff and her husband were in enjoyment of the suit propert
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
