Mani v. Kumari
Case brief
What is this about?
The Madras High Court allowed a second appeal in a property dispute. The appellants sought to restore a prior decree upholding their title to inheritance property. The Court held that the defendants failed to prove their claim of adoption under the Hindu Succession Act. The declaration prayer was deemed unnecessary as title was proved incidentally.
What did the court decide?
The judgment and decree dated 21.02.2011 passed by the Additional Subordinate Judge are set aside. The judgment and decree dated 18.09.2009 passed by the Principal District Munsif are restored. The Ci
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS
Judgment Reserved on : 12.07.2017 Judgment Pronounced on : 26.07.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.BASKARAN
S.A.No.8 of 2013
and
C.M.P.No.9976 of 2018
1.Mani
2.Ramados
3.Sekar
4.Balu ... Appellants/Respondents
1 to 4/Plaintiffs
Vs.
1.Kumari ...1 st Respondent/Appellant/3rd Defendant
- 2.The Junior Engineer, (Operation and Maintenance) Tamil Nadu Electricity Boad, Tindivanam.
3.The Assistant Engineer,(Town),
Tamil Nadu Electricity Boad,
Tindivanam. ...2 & 3 Respondents/5 & 6 Respondents
/1 & 2 Defendants
This second appeal has been filed under Section 100 of CPC, against the judgment and decree dated 21.02.2011 passed by the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Tindivanam, in A.S.No.41 of 2009, reversing the Judgment and decree dated 18.09.2009 passed by the learned Principal District Munsif, Tindivanam, in O.S.No.445 of 2007.
For Appellants : Mr.R.Thiagarajan
For Respondents : Mr.N.Mala for R-1
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the lower appellate Court erred in reversing the trial Court's decree without setting aside the finding that the third defendant failed to prove the adoption of Veerasamy.
Whether the burden of disproving alleged adoption should be cast on the defendants rather than the plaintiffs.
Whether a suit for bare injunction is maintainable without a prayer for declaration of title when plaintiffs prove their title incidentally.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Mani
- appellant
Ramados
- appellant
Sekar
- appellant
Balu
- respondent
Kumari
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court