REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Shenbagamurthy Appellant

V/S

Adi Thirugnanasambandam Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

PONNAIYAN V MUNIAN (DIED) AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
THE KARNATAKA WAKF BOARD V STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
PAPPAYAMMAL V PALANISAMY AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
ANTHONY CHELLAPPA V VICTORIA AMMAL [REFERRED TO]
SADASIVA GOUNDER AND ANR. V PURUSHOTHAMAN [REFERRED TO]
P.SUBRAMANIA CHETTIAR V TMT. AMIRTHAM AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
S.MURUGESAN V V.VIJAY SAI AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
DHANABAGHYAM AMMAL (DIED) AND ORS. V DHANAVEL AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
S M KARIM VS. BIBI SAKINA [REFERRED TO]
MITHILESH KUMARI VS. PREM BEHARI KHARE [REFERRED TO]
PARSINNI VS. SUKHI [REFERRED TO]
R RAJAGOPAL REDDY VS. PADMINI CHANDRASEKHARAN [REFERRED TO]
MAHESH CHAND SHARMA VS. RAJ KUMARI SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
D N VENKATARAYAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
ROOP SINGH DEAD VS. RAM SINGH DEAD [REFERRED TO]
RAME GOWDA VS. VARADAPPA NAIDU [REFERRED TO]
KARNATAKA BOARD OF WAKF VS. GOVT OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
T ANJANAPPA VS. SOMALINGAPPA [REFERRED TO]
CHATTI KONATI RAO VS. PALLE VENKATA SUBBA RAO [REFERRED TO]
SAMITTRI DEVI VS. SAMPURAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
A KRISHNAPPA VS. THIMMARAYAPPA [REFERRED TO]
N S Spance VS. D S Kanagarajan [REFERRED TO]
A VEDANAYAGAM VS. ANNAKILI [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendants in O.S.No.58 of 2004 on the file of District Munsif, Sivagangai are the appellants.

(2.) ACCORDING to the plaintiff/respondent, on 14/7/1930, the suit property was purchased by one Muthuirulappa Pillai. He had enjoyed it. After him, his son Subramanian enjoyed it. On 4/6/2001, he sold the property to the plaintiff. Plaintiff put up a compound wall and a grill gate. He had also reared certain medicinal and flower plants. Defendants have made some untenable claim and tried to interfere with plaintiff's possession. Thus, the plaintiff filed the suit for declaration as to his title to the suit property and consequential injunction as against the defendants.

(3.) THE trial Court framed necessary issues. Tried the suit as well as the counter-claim. During the trial, plaintiff Tirugnanasambandam examined himself as P.W.1 and one Rajendiran as P.W.2 and marked Exs.A.1 to A.13. The second defendant Shenbagavalli examined herself as D.W.1 and Ramamoorthi, Mani and Shenbagham as D.Ws.2 to 4 and marked Exs.B.1 to 65.

Click here to view full judgment.

SHENBAGAMURTHY Vs. ADI THIRUGNANASAMBANDAM

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address