S.Krishnan vs P.Iyappan - 2026 Supreme(Mad) 1553

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Mad) 1553

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B.BALAJI
S.Krishnan – Appellant
Versus
P.Iyappan – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.H.Arumugam
For the Respondent: Mr.Raguvaran Gopalan for Mr.G.Mohan Kumar

Table of Content
1. framing substantial questions of law on title admission and parties. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. plaintiff seeks title declaration and injunction over courtyard. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
3. appellant: admission implies title; respondent: non-joinder and misdescription. (Para 10 , 11)
4. non-joinder of co-heirs bars absolute title declaration. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
5. unproved adverse possession fails; injunction granted despite no easement plea. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 24)
6. pleadings limit relief; appeal partly allowed for injunction. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 25)

JUDGMENT :

P.B.Balaji, J.

The plaintiff, aggrieved by the judgment and decree in A.S.No.10 of 2025 reversing the findings of the trial Court in O.S.No.161 of 2012 by the judgment and decree dated 31.03.2016, is the appellant in the present second appeal.

2. I have heard Mr.H.Arumugam, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr.Raguvaran Gopalan, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rank before the trial Court.

4. The second appeal was admitted on 17.036.2017, on the following substantial questions of law:

“1. Whether, if the defendant i

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Mad) 1553

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASP.B.BALAJIS.Krishnan – AppellantVersusP.Iyappan – Respondent

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B.BALAJI
S.Krishnan – Appellant
Versus
P.Iyappan – Respondent