Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. Sounthar, J
A.Thangamani – Appellant
Versus
D.Seethalakshmi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff seeks declaration of right of way. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. defendant's claim of no encroachment. (Para 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 3. discrepancies in plaintiff's encroachment claim. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. advocate commissioner's report supports defendant. (Para 10 , 13) |
| 5. court affirms lower court decisions. (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT
The unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant. She filed a suit seeking declaration of her right of way over the suit ‘B’ schedule property shown as ‘ABCD’ in the plaint plan. She also sought for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from putting up any construction in the suit ‘B’ schedule property. The plaintiff also sought for mandatory injunction directing the defendant to remove the construction already put up by her in the suit ‘B’ schedule property shown as ‘ABIJ’ in the plaint plan. The trial court dismissed the suit. The first appeal filed by the appellant/plaintiff was also dismissed.
Challenging the concurrent findings, the appellant/plaintiff has come before this court by way of second appeal.
2. According to the appellant/plaintiff, she purchased suit ‘A’ schedule property under registered sale deed dated 04.12.2008. The suit ‘B ‘schedule 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
