SEENIVASAN Vs. PETER JEBARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court in Second Appeal filed by the respondent No.1.

(2.) Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that once the application for bringing Saraswathi Ammal as party was allowed, the same became operative from the date of its filing and therefore, the sale by Saraswathi Ammal to Anna Pushpam Ammal and Lalitha Ammal under Ex. A2 to A7 did not convey any title. It was also submitted that the effect of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act 1882, (in short the 'Act') has also to be noted.