Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J
Sengottuvel – Appellant
Versus
Muthusamy Gounder @ Muthu Gounder – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership and partition of property. (Para 2) |
| 2. defendants deny validity of partition and easement rights. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. issues framed for trial. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. arguments presented by both parties. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. citations of relevant case law. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. court's assessment of evidence and legal principles. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 7. final judgment and confirmation of lower court's decision. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
JUDGMENT
This Second Appeal had been filed to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 29.08.2012 in A.S.No.24 of 2011 passed by the learned Sub Judge at Tiruchengode reversing the Judgment and Decree dated 09.07.2010 in O.S.No.305 of 2002 passed by the learned Principal District Munsif, Tiruchengode.
2. The brief averments of the amended plaint are as follows:
2.1. The suit properties and other properties originally belonged to one Raja Gounder and his brothers. The 1st Plaintiff's mother purchased common 1/5th share in old Survey Nos. 29 and 30 excluding 25 cents. The remaining 4/5th share was purchased by the ancestors of Defendants 2, 5 and others. Subsequently, in the resurvey, new numbers were assigned as S.No.182 and 1
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
