K.Arputhasamy, v. R.G.Palanivel
Case brief
What is this about?
The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court dismissed the second appeal filed by the defendant against a lower appellate court decree granting a permanent injunction to the plaintiff. The court confirmed the decision while clarifying that the judgment does not prejudice the appellant's right to establish title over his distinct property.
What did the court decide?
The Second Appeal is dismissed by confirming the judgment and decree of the lower Appellate Court.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.09.2016 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR S.A.(MD)No.443 of 2016 and C.M.P.(MD)No.4746 of 2016
K.Arputhasamy ... Appellant / Respondent / Defendant Vs. K.G.Palanivel ... Respondent / Appellant / Plaintiff
Prayer: The Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of C.P.C., against the decree and judgment dated 16.12.2014 passed in A.S.No.31 of 2014 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Judge (II), Thanjavur reversing the decree and judgment dated 25.04.2014 passed in O.S.No.174 of 2012 on the file of the District Munsif, Thiruvaiaru.
For Appellant : Mr.T.A.Ebenezer For Respondent : Mr.M.R.S.Prabhu
JUDGMENT
The Second Appeal is filed against the decree and judgment dated 16.12.2014 passed in A.S.No.31 of 2014 on the file of the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Thanjavur, reversing the decree and judgment dated 25.04.2014 passed in O.S.No.174 of 2012 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Thiruvaiaru.
2.The defendant in O.S.No.174 of 2012 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Thiruvaiaru, is the appellant in this Second Appeal.
3.The respondent / plaintiff filed a Suit in O.S.No.174 of 2012, for permanent injunction, restraining the appellant/defendant herein, in any way interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Second Appeal filed against the lower appellate court's decree granting permanent injunction should be allowed.
Whether the appellant has a right to restrain the suit property despite acquiring a distinct property.
Whether the appeal should be dismissed with liberty to seek declaration regarding the appellant's separate property.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
K. Arputhasamy
- respondent
K.G. Palanivel
Coram
S.S. Sundar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court