Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.SOUNTHAR, J
T.Vanajakshi – Appellant
Versus
M.Jayanthi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of family settlement and property dispute (Para 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 14) |
| 2. life estate rights and cause of action established (Para 11 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 3. parties' arguments on access and abandonment (Para 12 , 13) |
| 4. no abandonment or easement without proof (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. appeal partly allowed, decree restored (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
J U D G M E N T
The unsuccessful plaintiff in the suit is the appellant.
2. The plaintiff filed a suit seeking mandatory injunction directing the respondents 1 and 2/defendants 1 and 2 to permit her to enter ground floor of the suit property and also for permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 and 2 from carrying out any construction in the suit property without her consent. She also sought for mandatory injunction directing the 4th respondent/Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, to demolish the construction already made without written consent of the plaintiff.
3. The suit was decreed by the Trial Court as prayed for. Aggrieved by the same, the defendants 1 and 2 in the suit filed an appeal. The First Appellate Court reversed the findings of the Trial Court and dismissed the suit. Aggrieved by th
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
