Natanam v. Valleesan
Case brief
What is this about?
This is an appeal against the dismissal of a lawsuit for partition and possession. The High Court held that the appellants failed to prove title, rejected adverse possession, and confirmed the trial court's decree in favor of the Mutt.
What did the court decide?
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment and decree of O.S.No.4 of 2006 confirmed.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 24.01.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. AUTHINATHAN
A.S.No.36 of 2010 and M.P.No.1 of 2010
- Natanam
- Ramalingam
- Kannappan
- Sivakumar
- Venkatesan
- Manikandan
- Minor.Balamurugan
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellants were entitled to half share in the suit property?
Whether the Judgment and Decree of the trial Court are liable to be set aside?
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Natanam
- petitioner
Ramalingam
- petitioner
Kannappan
- petitioner
Sivakumar
- petitioner
Venkatesan
- petitioner
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court