Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Mr. P.VELMURUGAN, J
M.Paramasivam – Appellant
Versus
A.Ravi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts regarding the property ownership claim and its religious implications. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments presenting opposing claims of property ownership. (Para 4 , 6 , 8) |
| 3. court's evaluation of evidence indicating ownership and trust. (Para 10 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. final determination on ownership based on collective evidence. (Para 17) |
| 5. outcome of the appeal reaffirming trial court's findings. (Para 18) |
J U D G M E N T
This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed in Appeal Suit No.95 of 1998 by the III Additional Subordinate Court, Madurai, reversing the judgment and decree passed by the District Munsif Court, Madurai Taluk, Madurai in O.S.No.167 of 1996.
2.The appellant is the plaintiff, who instituted the suit in O.S.No.167 of 1996 for a declaration and permanent injunction. For convenience, the parties will be referred to according to their litigative status before the trial court.
3. The short facts of the plaintiff are as follows:
3.1. The plaintiff claims that the suit property, originally owned by Ayyakannu Asari, is a temple house dedicated to Lord Muniyandisamy and Karuppanasamy. Ayyakannu Asari created two wooden chariots, or sappa
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
