Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J
Muthian Gunasekaran – Appellant
Versus
K.Renuka – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. suit challenges partition deed; trial court rejected plaint dismissal. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 6) |
| 2. incorrect survey numbers defeat cause of action. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. survey disputes require trial evidence; revision dismissed. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this revision to set aside the impugned order passed by the trial Judge in in IA.No. 3 of 2019 in OS.No.5640 of 2019 on the file of the XVIII Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai.
2. Before the trial Court, the defendants filed an application to reject the plaint, contending that the survey number and paimas number mentioned in the plaint actually belong to the defendants’ property, and that the plaintiff has filed the suit with incorrect particulars.
3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner contended that, as per a family partition deed, the property in Survey No. 22 belongs to the defendants. However, the plaintiff has filed the suit describing the property as T.S. No. 20. The encumbrance certificate also shows entries relating to T.S. No. 22, and not T.S. No. 20. Therefore, the suit has been filed with incorrect details, and there is no cause of action. Hence, rejection of the plaint was sou
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
