Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.D.MARIA CLETE, J
Kandavel – Appellant
Versus
Jayalakshmi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff's claim involves a contested land area related to past partition deeds. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. trial court confirmed dismissal based on lack of evidence for ancestral property claim. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. the appeal argues prior rulings were misapplied concerning res judicata. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. the boundaries defined in prior documents take precedence over extent in partition claims. (Para 14 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. the second appeal was dismissed with no costs. (Para 18) |
JUDGMENT
Heard.
2. This Second Appeal is filed by the plaintiff in O.S. No.1187 of 2005, assailing the judgment and decree dated 03.07.2013 passed in A.S. No.13 of 2010 by the Principal Sub Judge, Puducherry, whereby the judgment and decree of dismissal dated 15.09.2009 made in O.S. No.1187 of 2005 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif, Puducherry, came to be confirmed.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred as they were arrayed before the trial Court.
4. The plaintiff filed this suit seeking partition and separate possession of his ½ share in the plaint schedule property, along with mesne profits. He contends that the plaint schedule property is a strip of manai land l
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
