The High Court dismissed the Second Appeal, confirming the lower courts' decision. It held that the plaintiff's purchases were vitiated by lis pendens due to the pending preliminary decree at the time of sale and dismissed the appeal as no question of law arose.
The Second Appeal was dismissed, confirming the judgment and decree of the Courts below with no costs.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.03.2018
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
S.A.No.159 of 2018
Vimalasundari Ammal ... Appellant/plaintiff
Vs.
Sundaram ... Respondent/defendant
Prayer:- The Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code against the Judgment and decree dated 11.11.2009 in A.S.No.15 of 2008 on the file of the Sub Judge, Neyveli confirming the judgment and decree dated 01.02.2008 in O.S.No.81 of 2006 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Selvakumar
For Respondent : Mr.V.Anand
J U D G M E N T
Aggrieved by the unanimous findings of the Courts below, the plaintiff has filed the above Second Appeal in a suit for declaration and permanent injunction.
the judgment and decree of the Courts below. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-II)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
srn
To
1.The Subordinate Judge, Neyveli
2. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Neyveli.
Copy to
The Section Officer, V.R. Section,
High Court, Madras.(2 copies)
+1cc to Mr.R.SELVAKUMAR, Advocate, S.R.No.17504
+1cc to Mr.V.ANAND, Advocate, S.R.No. 18185
S.A.No.159 of 2018
MG(CO)
TR(09/04/2018)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a Second Appeal could be maintained when there were no questions of law arising from the concurrent findings of the Courts below.
Whether the plaintiff's purchases of the property were hit by the doctrine of lis pendens as the transactions occurred while a preliminary decree was pending.
Whether the plaintiff was entitled to a decree regarding the balance of land extent not covered by the execution proceedings.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Vimalasundari Ammal
Sundaram
Pushpa Sathyanarayana
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
