Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B.BALAJI, J
P.Raj Perumal Mudaliar – Appellant
Versus
V.Karunakaran – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. understanding the background and rights claimed by the petitioner. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. court analysis of the petitioner's claim vs. existing title transfers. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. final ruling on the petition. (Para 8) |
ORDER
The petitioner is a third party, challenging the order in an unnumbered E.A.G.No.10423 of 2025 dated 14.11.2025.
2.I have heard Mrs.T.Sundari, learned counsel for the revision petitioner.
3.Mrs.T.Sundari, learned counsel for the revision petitioner would state that the petitioner had entered into an agreement of sale with the lawful owner of the property and consequent to refusal of the vendor to come forward to execute the sale deed, the petitioner was constrained to file a suit in O.S.No.43 of 2018 for specific performance. The said suit was decreed and the petitioner also filed E.P.No.84 of 2019 for executing the decree for specific performance, which however came to be dismissed.
4.According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondents/decree holders have filed a suit in O.S.No.491 of 2019 and obtained a decree against the watchman of the property and in order to execute the decree, E.P.No.111 of 2024 was filed, which came to the knowle
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
